Markets
  • Corn$4.97/bu-1.0%
  • Soybeans$12.77/bu-0.5%
  • Soybean meal$347.00/US ton-1.8%
  • Soybean oil$0.6863/lb+1.9%
  • SRW wheat$6.83/bu+0.0%
  • HRW wheat$7.34/bu-0.4%
  • Live cattle$221.40/cwt-0.8%
  • Feeder cattle$331.07/cwt-1.6%
  • Lean hogs$70.08/cwt+1.7%
Feed Safety

EU Council Backs 'Technical Zero' Pesticide Residue Limits for Food and Feed Imports

The Council of the European Union has adopted its negotiating position calling for maximum residue levels of certain hazardous pesticides in imported food and feed to be lowered to the limit of quantification — known as technical zero — pending an impact assessment. The mandate, part of the Omnibus X food and feed safety package, expands coverage to substances posing risks to honeybees or groundwater, but the rules are not yet in force and require the European Parliament to adopt its own position before negotiations can begin.

The Council of the European Union adopted its negotiating mandate on 1 October 2026, calling for maximum residue levels (MRLs) of certain particularly hazardous pesticides in imported food and feed to be lowered to what is described as technical zero — the lowest concentration that can be quantified through routine monitoring using validated control methods.

The mandate forms part of the Council's position on the remaining elements of the Omnibus X food and feed safety package, which the European Commission presented in December 2025. The package amends ten pieces of EU legislation and addresses pesticides, biocidal products, feed additives, official controls, and products derived from fermentation using genetically modified microorganisms. According to the source, the Commission estimates the package as a whole could reduce administrative costs by almost €1 billion per year.

The mechanism targets substances that are not approved for use in the EU and carry properties considered particularly hazardous. Under the Council's position, MRLs for such substances — where currently based on Codex Alimentarius standards or agricultural practices in exporting countries — could be reduced to the limit of quantification following a prior impact assessment alongside the EU food safety risk assessment process.

The Council expanded the scope of the original Commission proposal. In addition to substances with carcinogenic, mutagenic, reproductive toxic, endocrine-disrupting, or environmentally persistent properties, the mandate now covers substances whose normal conditions of use may have unacceptable effects on honeybees or on the survival and development of their colonies, as well as circumstances in which use could result in groundwater concentrations that fail to comply with EU approval criteria.

The source notes that technical zero does not mean the absolute absence of every pesticide molecule, but rather the lowest validated residue concentration that can be quantified and reported through routine monitoring using validated control methods.

The mandate preserves derogations for certain uses authorised within the EU, meaning the mechanism would not automatically lower every residue limit associated with a covered substance. The Council also maintains the possibility of transitional measures: products lawfully placed on the market or stored for sale before a new limit takes effect could continue to be marketed under conditions established in the relevant measure. The source states this is intended to prevent unnecessary economic losses and food waste, particularly for products with longer shelf lives, while giving operators and exporting countries time to adapt.

The package also introduces changes to rules for plant protection products. The Council's position proposes priority assessment for biocontrol substances, unlimited approval periods for low-risk active substances and products containing them (subject to specified exceptions), and longer approval periods for other substances — up to 15 years for initial approvals and 25 years for subsequent renewals. The mandate pairs these longer periods with additional safeguards, including periodic reviews of scientific literature and available monitoring data by the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA).

The procedure — registered as 2025/0410(COD) — is being handled under the ordinary legislative procedure. In the European Parliament, joint responsibility lies with the Committee on Environment, Climate and Food Safety and the Committee on Agriculture and Rural Development. Parliament has not yet adopted its position. Until it does, the Council mandate does not alter the rules currently applying to imports, and interinstitutional negotiations cannot begin.

Prepared with AI assistance by Endata and reviewed by the editorial team.

Sources

Continue reading

More in Feed Safety →
Feed Safety

EU Audit Clears Brazil's Poultry Controls on Antimicrobial Use, But Export Resumption Awaits Regulatory Steps

The European Commission's final audit report has found that Brazil's official poultry and honey supply chain controls meet EU standards on antimicrobial use, according to the Brazilian Association of Animal Protein (ABPA). However, the reinstatement of Brazil on the EU's approved suppliers list remains pending further European regulatory steps, including a yet-to-be-scheduled meeting of the Standing Committee on Plants, Animals, Food and Feed.

2 min read
Feed Safety

Uzbekistan's Senate Passes Risk-Based Food Safety Law Aligned with WTO Standards

Uzbekistan's Senate has approved a new Food Safety Law introducing risk-based state control, clearer responsibilities for food businesses, and expanded powers for the Food Safety Committee. The legislation, passed at the Senate's 20th plenary session, is designed to align the country's food safety framework with international practices and WTO requirements.

2 min read