News

The Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) is Canada's leading authority on food fraud oversight. This report shares how they prevented a significant amount of misrepresented food from being sold in Canada.

Between April 1, 2023, and March 31, 2024, the CFIA conducted a number of activities to prevent, detect and deter food fraud. Activities included:

• monitoring and analyzing risks and planning mitigation activities
• promoting awareness
• working with international counterparts
• advancing research and method development
• targeting surveillance and taking enforcement action where appropriate.

CFIA conducted 2 types of sampling during this timeframe: marketplace monitoring sampling (also referred to as targeted surveys) and targeted inspectorate sampling.

• Marketplace monitoring sampling involves samples collected by an independent third party contracted by the CFIA and occurs only at retail stores to gauge overall compliance of certain food products in the Canadian marketplace. 323 marketplace monitoring samples (coconut water, fresh meat, spices, sunflower oil, tea) were assessed to detect specific types of misrepresentation through laboratory analysis. Results demonstrated high compliance, except for coconut water which was lower.
• Targeted inspectorate sampling involves inspection and sampling by CFIA inspectors at different types of food businesses such as importers, domestic processors and retailers. The likelihood of finding non-compliance is higher because it targets food businesses associated with risk factors such as a history of non-compliance, gaps in preventive controls or unusual trading patterns. 712 targeted samples (fish, honey, meat, olive oil, organic fresh or frozen fruits and vegetables, other expensive oils, grated hard cheese, fruit juice, other foods) were assessed to detect specific types of misrepresentation through laboratory analysis. CFIA also conducted 345 label verifications, including basic label verifications and net quantity verifications. Overall, compliance rates were similar to previous years. Highlights include:
  • grated hard cheese, olive oil and other expensive oils had the lowest satisfactory rates for authenticity testing, whereas fish, fruit juice, meat and honey had the highest.
  • fish, olive oil and other expensive oils had the lowest compliance rates for label verifications, while organic fresh fruit and vegetables, grated hard cheese and other foods had the highest.

Read full report here.

Read more on CFIA's role in combatting food fraud.

The recent proliferation of tariffs on internationally-traded food has led to an increased focus on origin claims.  False origin claims can enable tariff avoidance.  On-pack claims also resonate strongly with consumers in some countries as consumers push back against the politics of tariffs and they increasingly champion home-produced food.  One of the clearest examples of this trend is in Canada.

There has been a renewed enforcement focus on “home-produced” claims in Canada.  A blog by legal firm Blake Cassels & Graydon gives a good summary of the rules and links to the primary legislation

• “Product of Canada” / “Canadian”: Vvirtually all of the ingredients, processing and labour must be Canadian. In practice, less than 2% of the ingredients can be sourced from outside of the country.  Products labelled as “100% Canadian” must be entirely made in Canada, from ingredients to processing and labour. Certain types of food, such as meat, fish and dairy, are subject to specific requirements to be labelled as a “Product of Canada.”
• “Made in Canada”: Products must have undergone their last substantial transformation in Canada. Claims must always be accompanied by a qualifying statement clarifying the origin of the ingredients, such as “Made in Canada with domestic and imported ingredients.” Even products made in Canada that contain no domestically produced ingredients can be labelled as “Made in Canada from imported ingredients” where the last substantial transformation occurs in Canada.
• “Local”: For food products to be considered “local”, the CFIA guidelines state that these must either be sold in the same province where they are produced, or within 50 kilometres if sold across provincial borders.
• Use of the Maple Leaf: Use of the stylized maple leaf from the National Flag of Canada (the 11-point maple leaf) may only be done with the permission of the Department of Canadian Heritage. The use of maple leaves other than the 11-point maple leaf is permitted on food packaging; however, depending on the context, this may be construed as a “Product of Canada” claim.
• Other Claims: More specific claims that describe the Canadian value added may be used, such as “packaged in Canada” or “brewed in Canada,” where the above claims cannot be made.

Photo by Nong on Unsplash

The latest version of this regular free round-up of US and Canadian regulation in the food industry, from legal firm DLA Piper, has been published on the Lexology blog platform.

August's edition includes commentary on:

• Plans to reorganise the USDA
• New senior appointments at USDA and FDA
• CFIA inspection frequency of Safe Food for Canadians (SFC) licensed premises
• FDA releases new food toxicity screening tool
• FDA food traceability compliance deadline extended to 2028
• FDA-commissioned report: "Roadmap to Produce Safety: Summary Report of the Produce Safety Dialogue"
• Saskatoon Farm foodborne illness outbreak linked to contaminated water.
• FDA moves to reclassify a synthetic opioid derived from kratom as a controlled substance
• FDA announces 2026 user fees for VQIP and TPP.
• FDA proposes amending Standard of Identity for pasteurized orange juice
• Canada-Australia beef trade reopens after 20-year ban.
• Brazilian coffee companies redirect coffee sales to China in response to US tariffs
• US tariffs may hurt US chocolate producers
• Misleading “Made in Canada” branding prompts scrutiny of grocer compliance
• Federal lawsuit targets Oregon’s Plastic Pollution and Recycling Modernization Act
• CDC: Americans get more than half of their calories from ultra-processed foods.
• IFIC report: consumer confidence in safety of the food supply is at a 13-year low
• Avian flu update.

Canada operates a statutory list of permitted supplemental ingredients (e.g. vitamins, minerals, amino acids) in food.  In addition, there is a temporary marketing approval (TMA) framework by exception, to use a specific supplement in a specific food.  The ongoing approval status of some of these TMA substances had been unclear.

This has now been clarified by a Health Canada notice.  It addresses this gap by issuing a table which provides information relevant to the use of these ingredients as conventional food ingredients and in supplemented foods, along with any data gaps that must be filled to establish safety as proposed supplemental ingredients.

In some cases, an ingredient has a history of safe use in food and is permitted as an ingredient (including in supplemented foods) on that basis. These ingredients may be used in all foods, including supplemented foods, according to the relevant provisions of the Food and Drug Regulations. Examples include certain food additives and flavourings. If use is proposed at levels higher than those with a history of safe use or if an ingredient has no such history, the ingredient would be considered a supplemental ingredient and require a pre-market assessment by Health Canada.

In spring 2021, Oceana Canada tested 94 seafood samples from retailers and restaurants in four major
Canadian cities: Toronto, Montreal, Ottawa and Halifax and found that of the samples tested, 46 per cent were mislabelled.

This is consistent with national testing conducted between 2017-2019, which showed that 47 per cent of 472 seafood samples tested were mislabelled in some way. Of these,
51 per cent of 373 samples were previously mislabelled in the same four cities tested.

Read full report.

This report contextualises the topic of food fraud across Canada’s agri-food system and presents a novel intervention framework to Deter, Identify and Prosecute (DIP) food fraud.

In this context, deter refers to the strengthening of regulatory and legal deterrents. Identify refers to the
scientific methods to identify food fraud and prosecute refers to the ability to use
the scientific evidence as a basis to prosecute bad actors.

The authors believe that this novel framework captures and integrates the key components which are essential
to reducing the risk of food fraud in Canada.

Read full report.