Primary ingredient origin is the extra label statement set by Article 26(3) of Regulation (EU) No 1169/2011. It applies when a food shows an origin and its main ingredient comes from elsewhere. Regulation (EU) 2018/775 fixes the wording, and it has applied since 1 April 2020.

An origin claim on your pack triggers Article 26(3)

Primary ingredient origin starts with a claim you made by choice. The food information rules have applied since 13 December 2014, so the framework behind that claim is old. Article 26(2)(a) of Regulation (EU) No 1169/2011 makes origin a must only where its absence “might mislead the consumer”. Dry soups, bars and breakfast mixes fall outside that trigger. So their makers add an origin claim because it sells. That claim then triggers Article 26(3).

Article 26(3) applies in one case. The origin of the food is given, and the origin of the primary ingredient differs. Two options then apply. You give the origin of that ingredient. Or you state that it differs from the origin of the food.

Regulation (EU) 2018/775 sets the detail, and it has applied since 1 April 2020. Article 1 covers origin shown “by any means”, so words, symbols, flags and maps all count. Generic place names fall outside the scope when no one reads them as origin.

A transitional rule covered old stock. Foods placed on the market or labelled before that date could be sold until stocks ran out. Industry objected to the drafting. FoodDrinkEurope called the layout rules “unnecessarily restrictive” and asked for two years, as FoodNavigator reported.

Primary ingredient origin follows two separate tests

Article 2(2)(q) of Regulation 1169/2011 gives the test. A primary ingredient represents “more than 50 %” of the food. It is also one “usually associated with the name of the food by the consumer”. Two tests thus apply independently. So a share above half settles it alone. Consumer link settles it even at a low share.

The Commission notice of 31 January 2020 covers both tests. One food may have several primary ingredients. Each one then needs its own statement. A food may also have none, when nothing passes half and nothing carries the name.

Compound ingredients count when they meet the test. A one-ingredient product counts too, if the place of work differs from where the crop grew. That point covers powders and slices sold under a plain name.

Practitioners have questioned the test since the rule appeared. Dominic Watkins of DWF told Food Manufacture that the rule “raises complex questions about determining which is the main ingredient”. Write your reasoning down. An inspector will ask how you reached it.

Which freeze-dried vegetable in the recipe carries the statement

Run the 50 % test on the finished food. The dry blend gives a misleading base. A soup base at 62 % dried vegetables gives a clear answer. Then split that blend into six vegetables. No single one passes the threshold, so the blend itself becomes the candidate.

Next comes the name test. A pack that says “pea and mint soup” points the buyer at peas, whatever the weight shows. Say your recipe draws its specification data for freeze-dried green peas from two growing regions. Both regions then belong in the statement.

Mixed sourcing creates a second problem. Purchasing may swap lots between countries inside one print run. Three options work here. Print “EU and non-EU”. Print the negative wording from Article 2(b). Or fix one sourcing country per SKU.

A worked example on a six-vegetable soup base

First, take a dry soup base with 48 % dried vegetables in the finished food. The blend also holds carrot at 14 %, leek at 9 %, green peas at 9 %, parsley root at 7 %, onion at 5 % and tomato at 4 %. No single vegetable passes 50 %, and the blend as a whole stays below it. So the share test returns nothing.

The name test then decides. A pack sold as “garden vegetable soup” names no single vegetable, so no ingredient inherits the name. On that reading the food has no primary ingredient, and Article 26(3) stays silent even with a “Made in Poland” flag on the front. Rename the same product “leek and potato soup” and the answer flips, because leek and potato then carry the name. Finally, keep that reasoning in the file, with the recipe version it refers to.

Recipes for freeze-dried vegetables in ready meal formulations often hold five to ten dried parts. Map each one against both tests. Then record the verdict per SKU, and review the map once a year. That review costs less than a reprint.

Customs origin answers a different question from primary ingredient origin

Article 60 of the Union Customs Code sets non-preferential origin. Paragraph 1 is short. Goods “wholly obtained in a single country” take the origin of that country.

Paragraph 2 then covers split work. Goods made in more than one country take the origin of the place of their “last, substantial, economically-justified processing or working”. The wording adds two limits. The work happens “in an undertaking equipped for that purpose”. It also results in a new product, or in “an important stage of manufacture”.

Two answers can therefore differ for one consignment. Customs may name the drying country. Your label follows Regulation 1169/2011 and its notice. Keep both answers in the spec, each with its own legal basis.

Question	Origin on the label	Customs origin
Legal basis	Art. 26(3) Reg. 1169/2011, Reg. 2018/775	Art. 59-60 Reg. 952/2013, Reg. 2015/2446
What it decides	What the buyer reads on the pack	Duties, quotas and trade measures
Test applied	Share of the food, or link to the name	Wholly obtained, or last substantial work
Level of detail	EU, non-EU, country or region	Country or territory
Who checks it	Food inspection bodies	Customs authorities

Freeze-drying and the last substantial processing test

Article 32 of Regulation (EU) 2015/2446 points to Annex 22-01. Goods listed there take origin where the annex rules are met. Article 33 adds a limit. Work loses its economic basis if the facts show it aimed to avoid trade measures.

Annex 22-01 does not cover every product. For goods off that list, the Commission says origin is set “on a case-by-case basis”. It also says that “no legally binding rules exist for these products”, on its page on non-preferential rules of origin. A fallback then points to the country behind the major part of the materials, by value or weight.

So fix the commodity code first, because the answer depends on it. Then ask your supplier which heading the material sits under. Ask whether Annex 22-01 lists that heading. Reading how the freeze-drying process changes the raw material helps you argue the case when no list rule applies.

Codex uses a similar test for labels. Section 4.5.2 of CXS 1-1985 treats the processing country as the origin. That applies when work in a second country changes the nature of the food.

Wording and placement of the primary ingredient origin statement

Article 2 of Regulation 2018/775 opens two routes. Route (a) names an area: “EU”, “non-EU” or “EU and non-EU”. A state, a third country or a known region also works. Route (b) uses the negative form, which reads “(name of the primary ingredient) do/does not originate from” the origin shown for the food.

Extra detail on top of route (a) stays allowed while it stays accurate. A line reading “non-EU (Serbia)” works when Serbia is right for that lot.

Layout rules come from the Commission notice. The text sits in the same field of vision as the origin of the food. Its x-height reaches at least 75 % of the x-height used there. It never drops below the minimum in Article 13(2) of Regulation 1169/2011.

Repetition follows each claim. If the origin of the food appears twice on the pack, both places need the ingredient text. Tell your designer early. A flag on the front and a “made in” line on the back count as two places.

The 2026 customs change adds a transport document to the import file

Regulation (EU) 2026/1422 of 25 June 2026 amends Regulation (EU) 2015/2447. It reworks the procedural rules on proof of non-preferential origin. Publication in the Official Journal followed later, on 30 June 2026. Two of its changes apply as of 1 July 2026.

Regulation (EU) 2015/2447 carries the detailed rules for the customs code. Its Article 57 asks for certificates of origin on the form in Annex 22-14, issued by the competent authorities of the third country. Articles 57 to 59 and that annex now allow electronic certificates from the ELAN system. That helps firms importing under special non-preferential arrangements during the transition to full ELAN use.

A new Article 59a adds one more document. Where these origin rules serve Regulation (EU) 2026/1455, the proof must also show that goods “were transported directly from the country of origin to the Union”. So ask your customs agent whether any incoming material falls under that regulation.

Marketing standards add a separate origin rule for some goods. Regulation (EU) 2023/2429 has applied since 1 January 2025. It covers the fruit and vegetables sector, plus dried fruits of CN codes 0804 20 90, 0806 20 and ex 0813. Its general standard asks for the full name of the country of origin on the package.

Six documents to request before artwork sign-off

Ask for the country where the crop grew, per lot or per contract. Then ask for the country where drying took place. The two differ often enough to matter. Inspectors work from the same documents, so file the origin evidence with the specification.

Request the commodity code used at import. Then add a statement of non-preferential origin that cites Article 60 of the customs code. Take the supplier declaration for any preferential claim as well. Finally, agree how the supplier warns you when a sourcing country shifts mid-contract.

Three checks then close the file. First, confirm that both origin texts sit in one field of vision on the approved artwork. Second, confirm that the x-height ratio holds on the print proof. Third, confirm that the spec names the evidence behind each origin line. Mandatory origin rules already apply in several categories, and inspectors read those files closely.

SALESWAVE confirms the growing country, the drying country and the customs code for a specific lot, once the documentation scope is agreed at specification stage.

Frequently asked questions