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

March 9, 2012

Food Registration with the Thai FDA: Overcoming Pitfalls

Bangkok Post, Corporate Counsellor Column

With its diverse range of consumers seeking both traditional wares and more modern Western-influenced products, Thailand, like Vietnam and many other Asean countries, has become a hugely attractive and a lucrative market for foreign and local food manufacturers alike.

But for foreign companies that want to import products into Thailand, their first interaction with the Thai Food and Drug Administration (FDA) too often ends with a firm rebuttal, as their products are rejected for registration or they face significant delays. This is especially true if the food and drug regulators in the countries they are used to dealing with lack a strong pre-marketing review system but instead rely only on a post-marketing process to protect consumers in the event of product liability lawsuits, such as the US.

Although these FDA obstacles can be frustrating, companies can achieve success by familiarizing themselves with Thai FDA practices and preparing for potential pitfalls.

New Food Ingredients

Prior to starting the registration process for a food product, a company must first determine whether all its ingredients have already been approved by the Thai FDA. An ingredient that is commonly registered in another country may not necessarily have been registered with the FDA.

For new ingredients, the FDA will request additional supporting documents. For example, a product used in food consumption must be able to show a history of use for more than 15 years in a foreign country and/or safety data.

Companies need to make strategic decisions about whether to retain the new food ingredient in a formula. On the one hand, the new ingredient can be helpful in differentiating the product from competitors, but on the other hand companies face an extended registration process when new ingredients are included.

Misclassification of Food

Companies often have a misconception that if their products are classified and registered in a certain category in a country such as Singapore, then they would fall into the same category in Thailand. This is not necessarily the case. Prior to FDA submission, an applicant must be fully aware of: (1) the ingredient list for its products; (2) the source of the ingredients; (3) the manufacturing process; (4) the objectives of use; and (5) the targeted consumer group. These factors will allow the company to:

  • Preliminarily classify the product; and
  • Assist in answering registration questions from the Thai FDA.

Misclassifying the product will delay the registration process, because companies are not permitted to transfer a dossier from one category to another. If a category change needs to be made, then the company must restart the application.

Requirements differ from one category to another. For example, if you misclassify a dietary supplement in the food supplement category, which does not require any analysis, when it is in fact a beverage in a sealed container, then this would mean additional documents and a detailed analysis are required. This causes further delays.

These delays can be avoided by carefully preparing and reviewing product ingredients and information before considering the classification.

Preparing Your Dossier Carefully

Asean lacks a system for harmonization of food products, and thus the product dossier requirements differ between member countries. In addition, some other countries, including the US, do not necessarily issue the same types of documents required by the Thai FDA.

The Thai FDA conducts a careful substantive examination of the documents provided, and any discrepancies will further delay the registration process. Companies should ensure that all documents, as requested by the FDA, are complete and consistent. If some documents are unavailable, then be prepared to provide a suitable response to the FDA.

Health Claims on Labels

The Thai FDA takes a stricter approach to claims on labels than in other countries, including the US. For example, the Thai FDA permits nutrition claims if appropriate analysis is conducted. However, health claims—that is, claims relating to benefits, efficacies and functions of the product—are forbidden.

Foreign companies perceive the Thai FDA interpretation as very strict, as it requires a complete amendment of their labels when they are designed abroad. In some cases, however, it is worth negotiating with the FDA, as its officials are willing to learn from industry specialists. It is important for industries to work closely with the FDA in providing assistance on how to differentiate between health claims, slogans and other advertising statements.

Regional Market

Food manufacturers and importers should no longer view Thailand as a stand-alone market when targeting it for their products, but rather part of the overall Asean Economic Community that is due to take effect in 2015. Using this approach, companies can maximize efficiency by planning to register their products across several Asean countries.

Understanding the mechanisms adopted by local Asean FDAs may appear cumbersome, but with assistance from technical experts any company can enjoy a smooth product launch and reap the considerable benefits offered by the increased integration of Asean markets.

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

August 23, 2022
On July 13, 2022, the Vietnamese government issued Decree No. 46/2022/ND-CP amending and supplementing some articles of Decree No. 13/2020/ND-CP providing detailed guidance on the Law on Animal Husbandry (“Decree 46”). The new decree took effect on the issuance date. Among the changes introduced by Decree 46 are a number related to animal feed. Recognition of Testing Methods of Exporting Countries Decree 46 clarifies the steps to recognize animal feed testing methods of laboratories in exporting countries. Under the amended regulations, the Department of Livestock Production (DLP) will organize an assessment team to appraise each dossier for recognition of animal feed testing methods within 30 days of receipt of a complete dossier. If the dossier lacks required information or authenticity, the DLP will organize a practical assessment team at the exporting country’s testing laboratory. If the dossier passes the assessment, within five working days from the completion of the assessment, the DLP will issue a decision on recognition of the testing method. The validity of this decision has been lengthened from three years to five years. State Inspection of Animal Feed Quality Process of State Inspection Decree 46 specifies the process to conduct state inspection of the quality of imported animal feed by unifying the regulations stipulated in the related legal documents listed in Decree 13. The process includes the submission of a state inspection dossier, timelines to receive feedback from the inspection authority, and further steps that can be taken upon receiving acceptance or refusal decisions from the authority. For traditional animal feed and complete compound animal feed, imported shipments are customs-cleared as soon as the importer completes the customs procedures. Within 15 days from the customs clearance date, the importer must submit the conformity assessment results. The importer has complete responsibility for the conformity assessment results, and
August 18, 2022
Practical Law has published an updated online version of Agricultural Law in Thailand, a Q&A-style guide that provides detailed overviews of Thailand’s agriculture laws and regulations. The Thailand overview is one of approximately twenty such guides to jurisdictions worldwide, covering key practical issues related to the legal environment for agricultural operations. The Thailand section, which was written by lawyers at Tilleke & Gibbins, covers the following topics: Agricultural policy Acquisition of agricultural companies Acquisition of agricultural land Crop seed business Plant variety rights Genetically modified crops Animal and animal welfare issues Agricultural safety and product liability Practical Law, produced by Thomson Reuters, is a comprehensive global legal resource for business lawyers. The platform features a wide range of guides covering hundreds of jurisdictions and practice areas. The full Agricultural Law in Thailand chapter can be accessed on the Practical Law website.
August 9, 2022
In late 2021, the government of Vietnam issued Decree 98 on the management of medical devices (Decree No. 98/2021/ND-CP dated November 8, 2021), which came into force on January 1, 2022. This is the primary legislation on medical devices in Vietnam. To provide necessary guidance and elaboration on the implementation of Decree 98, the Ministry of Health recently issued Circular No. 05/2022/TT/BYT dated August 1, 2022 (“Circular 05”), which took effect on the same day. The most notable aspect of Circular 05 is that it unifies, in a single legislative document, previous regulations on medical devices that were scattered in multiple circulars issued by the Ministry of Health (Circular No. 39/2016/TT-BYT dated October 28, 2106; Circular No. 46/2017/TT-BYT dated December 15, 2017, as amended by Circular No. 23/2021/TT-BYT dated December 9, 2021; and Circular No. 33/2020/TT-BYT dated December 31, 2020). The effectiveness of these circulars was terminated when Circular 05 took effect. Circular 05 sets out regulations and principles for the classification of medical devices, and adds or supplements the following lists: List of in vitro diagnostic medical devices (IVD) not subject to quality assessment by Vietnamese competent authorities when registering under the quick registration procedure. List of class B, C and D medical devices allowed to be traded as normal goods. List of medical devices required to be accredited for safety and technical functions before use. List of medical devices requiring import permit licenses. While Circular 05 does not introduce major changes to the previous regulations, the consolidation and up-to-date guidance on Decree 98 will simplify the task of registration and circulation for medical device companies doing business in Vietnam.
August 4, 2022
Cosmetics have become an essential feature of the modern lifestyle led by many consumers in Cambodia. Every day, a wide range of new cosmetic brands, variants, and formats enter the Cambodian market, catering to a growing consumer base. The market generally relies on the import of foreign cosmetic brands, making Cambodia an attractive market for overseas cosmetics companies, but local brands are on the rise as well. Alongside the significant growth of the cosmetics market in Cambodia, and the Royal Government’s continuing push to increase consumer protection in Cambodia, in 2022, the Ministry of Commerce (MOC) issued Prakas No. 0064 on the Requirements for Cosmetic Distribution (the Prakas). The Prakas applies to both locally manufactured and imported cosmetics, and both individual and businesses that trade in cosmetics. The Prakas aims to regulate cosmetics and cosmetic business activities, to ensure that cosmetics distributed in Cambodia are of good quality and safe for use.  The key points contained in the Prakas are summarized below. Legal Obligations for Trading Cosmetics Any person trading in cosmetics, including wholesale or retail, and those that offer cosmetics as gifts or for testing, must ensure that the products are safe and meet the legal labelling requirements. Anyone trading cosmetics must respect the Law on Consumer Protection, with the Prakas highlighting key aspects of that law and referring to the applicable penalties under that law. Online sellers of cosmetics must obtain an additional approval letter (for individuals) or a license (for legal entities) to operate an online business, issued by the MOC. In addition, they require a certificate for providing online services from the Ministry of Post and Telecommunications. Interestingly, the Prakas does not refer to the cosmetic business licensing required under regulations issued by the Ministry of Health. As the Prakas does not outright contradict these