You are using an outdated browser and your browsing experience will not be optimal. Please update to the latest version of Microsoft Edge, Google Chrome or Mozilla Firefox. Install Microsoft Edge

August 29, 2014

Food Labeling: A Recent Change in the Thai Paradigm

Informed Counsel

In response to consumers paying more attention to their dietary nutritional values, the food industry has taken steps to alter its approach to food product labeling. Labels that stipulate nutrient levels in food products (e.g., claiming low fat, high vitamin C, etc.) are now a common sight on food packaging. The Thai Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has, however, set certain criteria that must be met in order to make such nutritional claims and statements. Meanwhile, comparative claims, such as “the best,” “the most,” “the first,” etc., are prohibited, as the Thai FDA considers these claims to be difficult to prove.

The Thai FDA has issued legislation on “premium labeling,” a form of labeling that allows food producers to grade their food products, thus protecting their rights and the rights of consumers. The word “premium” on a food product label indicates that the food product possesses special qualities—qualities that the food producer must provide. Use of the word “premium” is subject to the approval of the Thai FDA. Such approval is obtained by citing evidence in support of the food’s “premium” quality (e.g., the food has been certified as organic, it has a geographical indication, or it has special ingredients). The first food products that received such approval were pasteurized milk and plain-fluid milk, both of which contain higher levels of milk protein, fat, and nonfat milk solids, as compared to other similar products.

Nutritional Labeling

Nutrition tables can be presented in three different formats: “full,” “short,” and “parallel.” The Ministry of Public Health’s Notification requires each table to contain certain information such as the amount of food per serving size, number of serving sizes per unit, nutrient content, and percentage of Thai Recommended Daily Intake (RDI) for each nutrient, per serving size, per day. A full format nutrition table must contain at least the following 15 mandatory nutrients:

  1. Total energy
  2. Energy from fat
  3. Total fat
  4. Saturated fat
  5. Cholesterol
  6. Protein
  7. Total carbohydrate
  8. Fiber
  9. Sugar
  10. Sodium
  11. Vitamin A
  12. Vitamin B1
  13. Vitamin B2
  14. Calcium
  15. Iron

However, if 8 or more of these 15 nutrients are low enough to be considered nonexistent, a short-format nutrition label can be used.

In the case that the food products must be mixed with other ingredients and/or processed according to the parallel label format, nutrition tables can be used to compare the nutritional values before and after preparation of the food product.

GDA Labeling

Obesity and related noncommunicable diseases have become global health concerns. The FDA has approached these issues by presenting nutritional information in recommended Guidelines of Daily Amounts (GDA), which aim to inform consumers of the amount of calories, sugars, fats, and sodium in food that they should be consuming daily. These guidelines are already used for some ready-to-eat foods, including fried or baked potato chips, crackers or biscuits, and wafers with fillings. These products must have nutrition and GDA labels, and must show the following statement: “Consume less and exercise for health.”

The GDA requires calories, sugars, fats, and sodium to be displayed on the front of the packaging by clearly declaring the nutrient content and the percentage of RDI per packaging unit, such as per sachet or carton. This information is shown in four cylindrical shapes. (See Fig. 2 below.)

Self-Regulating Product Labeling

On January 21, 2014, the FDA reclassified seven food products (sealed beverages, canned food, cow milk, flavored milk, fermented milk, milk products, and ice cream) as Standardized Foods. Under this category, food producers’ product labels must comply with FDA regulations and do not need label approval from the FDA. But some high-risk food products (e.g., medical foods, infant foods, modified milk for infants, weight-control foods, food additives, etc.) are still required to be submitted to and approved by the FDA for label preparation.

Which Food Labeling Requirements Have Changed?

Normally, a product label must provide the following information in Thai: (1) product name; (2) serial number; (3) importer’s or manufacturer’s name and address; (4) metric declaration of quantity; (5) ingredient list; and (6) production and expiration dates.

A noticeable change in the updated food labeling requirements is the addition of allergen information. Previously, the declaration of allergen information was on a voluntary basis. Now, it is mandatory to declare the allergen information of products that use the following ingredients:

  • Cereals that contain gluten, such as wheat, rye, spelt, or hybrid varieties, and their products;
  • Crustaceans and crustacean products;
  • Eggs and egg products;
  • Fish and fish products;
  • Peanuts, soybeans, and their products;
  • Milk and milk products (including lactose);
  • Hard-shelled nuts (such as pistachios), nuts, tree nuts (e.g., almonds, walnuts, pecans), and their products; and
  • Sulphite in concentrations of 10 mg/kg or more.

How to Comply with the Changed Regulations

Food regulations, particularly for food and nutrition labels, are becoming more dynamic and self-regulated than they have ever been in the past. Although this change in paradigm is beneficial for the food business, such autonomy means that food companies should have their labels carefully reviewed by lawyers and food consultants who have the proper technical and legislative knowledge, in order to fully comply with the law.

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

September 9, 2026
On August 5, 2026, the Consumer Case Division of Thailand’s Civil Court rendered a judgment in a case involving a beauty clinic that advertised acne scar treatments using claims that the clinic was operated by a specialist physician and that the treatment, allegedly involving stem cell technology, could permanently remove acne scars. The plaintiff brought a claim against both the physician-owner and the clinic company, alleging that the advertisements were false and induced her to purchase the treatment. The court found that the clinic was liable for the false representations and that the physician-owner, as both the authorized director of the company and the medical practitioner who provided treatment, was jointly responsible. Although the plaintiff could not fully prove all damages claimed, the court awarded compensation of THB 20,000, together with interest. While the judgment arose from a consumer protection dispute, it serves as a valuable reminder that medical facility advertisements in Thailand are regulated and may expose clinics and healthcare providers not only to regulatory enforcement but also to civil liability from patients who rely on misleading promotional claims. Regulatory Framework Governing Medical Facility Advertisements Medical facility advertising in Thailand is governed by the Medical Facility Act B.E. 2541 (1998), as amended by the Medical Facility Act (No. 4) B.E. 2559 (2016). The principal secondary legislation is the Department of Health Service Support (DoHSS) Notification Re: Rules, Procedures, Conditions, and Fees for an Advertisement or Publication Concerning a Medical Facility, which came into force on November 25, 2019. Under this notification, “advertising” includes any act, by any means, that causes members of the public to see, hear, or otherwise become aware of a message, sound, or image for the commercial benefit of a medical facility. This broad definition covers not only traditional media but also clinic websites, social
September 9, 2026
On June 30, 2026, Indonesia’s National Agency of Drug and Food Control (BPOM) issued BPOM Regulation No. 11 of 2026 on Food Packaging, which expands the list of approved food-contact substances and recognizes a broader range of permissible functions for those substances. The new regulation, which revokes BPOM Regulation No. 20 of 2019, reflects developments in packaging technology and materials science. Although the new regulation provides more advantages to business actors by adding more food contact substances to the approved list for use in food packaging, there are more stringent rules and restrictions for testing. One of the most significant changes is a comprehensive migration-testing framework that sets out requirements for packaging materials, testing conditions, food simulants, and specific migration limits. Overall and Specific Migration Under BPOM Regulation No. 20 of 2019, migration requirements were primarily set out within the lists of approved food-contact substances and packaging materials. BPOM Regulation No. 11 of 2026 instead expressly requires packaging materials that come into direct contact with food to meet both overall and specific migration limits. These are defined as follows: Overall migration: The total quantity of all substances that migrate from the packaging, regardless of whether the substances are hazardous or nonhazardous to health. Specific migration: The quantity of a particular identified substance known to be hazardous to health that migrates from the packaging. Stricter Limits on Heavy Metals The overall migration limit for plastic packaging remains unchanged under both regulations at 60 mg/kg or 10 mg/dm². However, the new regulation introduces significant changes to the regulation of heavy metals. Under the 2019 regulation, four heavy metals—lead, cadmium, chromium VI, and mercury—were subject to a single combined limit of 1 mg/kg. The 2026 regulation, however, requires each heavy metal to meet its own individual specific migration limit, adds arsenic as
September 7, 2026
Indonesia’s Constitutional Court (Mahkamah Konstitusi) has reinstated a key provision limiting pharmaceutical patent protection, signaling a renewed commitment to balancing patent rights with public access to medicines. In its ruling to Case No. 255/PUU-XXIII/2025, the court partially granted a petition for judicial review of Law No. 65 of 2024, which had amended the country’s Patent Law, and ordered the restoration of a provision that had excluded certain pharmaceutical inventions from patentability. The decision took effect immediately upon its pronouncement at the court’s plenary session on August 28, 2026. Background The petition challenged the removal of article 4(f) from Law No. 13 of 2016 concerning Patents (Patent Law), as amended by Law No. 65 of 2024. Article 4(f) had excluded from patentability certain inventions relating to new uses of known substances. The petitioners argued that removing this provision would open the door to patent protection for second medical use inventions and facilitate patent evergreening—practices that can extend exclusivity periods, delay generic market entry, and reduce public access to affordable medicines. The petitioners included several patient advocacy and public-interest organizations: the Indonesian Dialysis Patients Community Association, the Indonesian Association of Drug Abuse Victims (PKNI), the Indonesian Pulmonary Hypertension Foundation (YHPI), the Rekat Peduli Indonesia Foundation, and the Indonesian Positive Women’s Association (IPPI), along with the Indonesia for Global Justice Association and four individual petitioners. The petitioners also challenged the constitutionality of the phrase “interested party” in article 70(1) of the Patent Law, arguing that it should be construed expressly to clarify who has standing to appeal a decision to grant a patent before the Board of Patent Appeal, and to allow a broader range of parties—such as patent holders, licensees, consumer organizations, prosecutors, aggrieved third parties, and others who may suffer direct or indirect harm from the grant of a patent—to
September 4, 2026
Blind boxes and collectibles have become increasingly popular, driven by the excitement of not knowing which character or design will be revealed until the package is opened. While most visible in the art toy market, the same concept is also used in the food industry. Confectionery, snacks, and other food products are sometimes sold with toys, character figures, cards, or other collectibles. A package might, for example, contain one of ten possible characters, with consumers knowing that an item is included but not which one they will receive. Some collections may also feature rare or “secret” items. For food businesses, however, adding a randomized toy or collectible involves more than a marketing decision. The food, the nonfood item, and the randomized mechanism may each raise different regulatory considerations in Thailand. Thai FDA Requirements for Nonfood Objects Packaged with Food The main food regulatory consideration is Ministry of Public Health Notification No. 310 B.E. 2551 (2008), which regulates food packaged together with things or objects that are not food. Under Notification No. 310, certain nonfood objects may be packaged together with food where they fall within specified exceptions, including objects that serve the following purposes: Maintaining the quality or standard of the food, such as a desiccant or oxygen absorber; Serving as a seasoning or as part of food preparation, such as chili powder sachets or seasoning sachets contained in instant noodle packages; or Functioning as an eating or food-preparation utensil, such as a spoon or fork included with instant noodles. Other nonfood objects that do not fall within these categories generally should not be placed inside the food container together with the food. Where a toy, collectible, or other nonfood object is intended to be sold together with a food product, businesses should therefore carefully consider the nature of