Bioengineered Food Labeling Changes

What the USDA Court Ruling Means for Highly Refined Ingredients

Bioengineered food labeling requirements in the United States may be heading toward an important change. A federal appeals court ruling has required the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) to reconsider how its National Bioengineered Food Disclosure Standard applies to highly refined ingredients derived from bioengineered crops.


Under the current standard, ingredients such as soybean oil, canola oil, corn starch, and sugar may not require a bioengineered food disclosure when processing has made modified genetic material undetectable. The recent court decision questioned the legal basis USDA used to create that exclusion, opening the door to future changes in how these ingredients are evaluated and labeled.



For food companies working with ingredients derived from corn, soybeans, canola, sugar beets, and other crops available in bioengineered varieties, the issue is worth following closely. While the existing federal framework remains in effect for now, USDA has begun the process of reconsidering the regulation.

What Is the National Bioengineered Food Disclosure Standard?

The National Bioengineered Food Disclosure Standard, or NBFDS, establishes federal requirements for identifying certain bioengineered foods sold at retail in the United States. Mandatory compliance with the standard began January 1, 2022.


Under the current USDA definition, a bioengineered food generally contains detectable genetic material that has been modified through certain laboratory techniques and could not otherwise be obtained through conventional breeding or found in nature.


USDA also maintains a List of Bioengineered Foods that identifies foods commercially available in bioengineered forms. The current list includes crops and foods such as:

  • Corn
  • Soybean
  • Canola
  • Cotton
  • Sugar beet
  • Sugarcane
  • Potato
  • Certain apples
  • Certain squash
  • Certain papaya
  • Alfalfa
  • AquAdvantage salmon


The list helps identify ingredients that may require additional documentation. However, it is not the only factor used to determine whether disclosure is required. A food that is not on the list may still require disclosure if records demonstrate that it is bioengineered.

Why Are Highly Refined Ingredients Important?

Highly refined ingredients are at the center of the current regulatory issue because processing can remove or degrade DNA until modified genetic material can no longer be detected.


Under existing USDA guidance, whether a processed ingredient derived from a bioengineered crop requires disclosure depends largely on whether modified genetic material remains detectable.


For example, ingredients such as corn starch, canola oil, and soy lecithin may be derived from crops available in bioengineered varieties. Under the current rule, if modified genetic material is detectable, the ingredient may meet the definition of a bioengineered food ingredient and require disclosure. If appropriate records establish that the ingredient has been refined so that modified genetic material is no longer detectable, disclosure generally has not been required.


This distinction has allowed many highly refined ingredients to fall outside mandatory bioengineered food disclosure requirements even when they originated from bioengineered crops.

What Did the Court Decide About Bioengineered Food Labeling?

In Natural Grocers v. Rollins, decided October 31, 2025, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit concluded that USDA made a legal error when it generally excluded highly refined foods from the definition of bioengineered food based on the absence of detectable modified genetic material.


The decision did not immediately establish a new labeling standard for highly refined foods. Instead, the court sent the issue back for further consideration and required USDA to reassess its regulatory approach using the appropriate statutory authority.


An important distinction is that the court did not rule that every ingredient derived from a bioengineered crop must automatically carry a bioengineered disclosure. The court noted that USDA may have authority elsewhere in the law to establish thresholds or other criteria for determining when a food is subject to disclosure.


That means the eventual requirements will depend on how USDA responds through rulemaking.

Are Current Bioengineered Food Labeling Requirements Still in Effect?

For now, the existing federal bioengineered food disclosure framework remains in place while the court proceedings and USDA rulemaking continue.


USDA has formally placed a National Bioengineered Food Disclosure Standard – Court Remand action on its regulatory agenda. As of August 2026, the action is listed at the proposed-rule stage, with USDA's Agricultural Marketing Service indicating that it intends to address deficiencies identified by the Ninth Circuit.


This distinction is important. The court ruling signals that changes are coming, but it should not be interpreted as a finalized replacement standard.

How Could the Ruling Affect Ingredient Documentation?

One of the most significant effects may involve the records used to determine whether a food requires a bioengineered disclosure.


Under the current system, USDA allows several ways to establish that modified genetic material is not detectable. These can include records showing that an ingredient was produced from a non-bioengineered source, documentation validating a refining process that renders modified genetic material undetectable, or testing records confirming the absence of detectable modified genetic material.


As USDA revisits the rule, relying only on documentation demonstrating non-detectability may not provide the same regulatory outcome in the future.


Ingredient records may therefore become increasingly important, including information about:

  • Crop or ingredient source
  • Bioengineered status
  • Supplier specifications
  • Certificates and supply-chain documentation
  • Refining processes
  • Process validation
  • Analytical testing results


Maintaining detailed ingredient documentation can make it easier to reassess products if USDA changes the disclosure criteria.

What Role Does Testing Play in Bioengineered Food Disclosure?

Analytical testing can currently be one part of determining whether modified genetic material is detectable in a highly refined ingredient. USDA has issued guidance addressing testing methods and validation procedures associated with the existing standard.


Testing, however, should not be viewed as interchangeable with a complete regulatory assessment.


A test result showing no detectable modified genetic material may support a disclosure determination under the current framework, but the court ruling specifically challenges the legal reasoning behind using non-detectability as the basis for excluding highly refined foods.


Depending on USDA's revised rule, the origin of an ingredient, the amount of bioengineered substance present, processing history, supplier documentation, or other criteria could become more important alongside analytical results.


Testing can provide useful scientific information, but disclosure decisions also depend on how that information fits within the applicable regulatory definition.

Could Digital Bioengineered Food Disclosures Also Change?

Highly refined ingredients were not the only issue addressed by the Ninth Circuit.


The court also addressed provisions allowing electronic or digital links, including QR-code-based disclosures, and text-message disclosures. The court concluded that the district court should have prospectively vacated regulations governing these disclosure methods after finding problems with them.


USDA is expected to address these disclosure methods separately. This means future changes to the Bioengineered Food Disclosure Standard could affect both which foods require disclosure and how the disclosure may appear or be accessed.


Traditional on-package text and USDA-approved bioengineered food symbols remain important disclosure options under the current standard.

What Should Be Reviewed While USDA Develops the New Rule?

The final requirements have not yet been established, and broad label changes based solely on the court ruling may be premature. However, this is an appropriate time to review products that contain ingredients derived from crops on USDA's List of Bioengineered Foods.


Particular attention may be useful for highly refined ingredients that historically have not required disclosure because modified genetic material was considered undetectable.


Reviewing supplier documentation, ingredient specifications, existing testing records, formulation information, and current label disclosures can help identify which products may be affected if USDA changes the definition or establishes a new threshold.


The regulatory process should also be monitored closely. A proposed rule will provide more detail about USDA's intended approach and may include an opportunity for public comment before requirements are finalized.

Preparing for the Next Phase of Bioengineered Food Labeling

The Ninth Circuit ruling does not eliminate the National Bioengineered Food Disclosure Standard, nor does it immediately require every highly refined ingredient derived from a bioengineered crop to carry a disclosure. It does, however, require USDA to reconsider an important part of the existing system.


The key question is shifting from simply whether modified genetic material can be detected to how USDA will ultimately define the point at which a food derived from bioengineering requires disclosure.


Until revised regulations are issued, ingredient traceability, supplier documentation, analytical records, and careful label review remain important tools for evaluating bioengineered food labeling requirements. Following the USDA rulemaking process will be particularly important as the agency clarifies how highly refined ingredients will be treated under the next version of the standard.


Additional information can be found:

Share this article: