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 24, 2015

Front-of-Package Labeling in Thailand

Informed Counsel

Expanding waistlines and increasing health awareness have given rise to a consumer culture infatuated with well-being, not only in Thailand but all over the world. For producers, this means intense pressure to create healthy or healthier versions of their products. For the government—specifically the Thai Food and Drug Administration (FDA)—this means an obligation to implement and enforce stricter regulations on food and nutrition.

The Thai Perspective

As we move into an age where life is increasingly fast-paced, there is no reason why the food industry should be left behind. While nutritional labels are often displayed on the back of packaging, Front-of-Package (FOP) labeling has become popular among policy makers because it simplifies the most important information and places it where it is visible at first sight to the hurried consumer. In Thailand, the original 1998 Notification of the Ministry of Public Health (MOPH) implemented non-FOP nutritional labeling requirements which were mandatory for certain foods and voluntary for others. A survey conducted in 2009, however, concluded that the nutritional information was difficult to understand, which caused the FDA to make a number of changes.

In a series of subsequent ministerial notifications, the FDA implemented the Guideline Daily Amount (GDA) system of labeling, an FOP system that made GDA labels mandatory for snack products and certain ready-to-eat foods. The current GDA label breaks down nutritional information into four categories: calories, sugars, fats, and sodium. This requires producers to clearly state the nutrient content and percentage of recommended daily intake per package.

FOP Labeling Around the World

Countries around the world have also introduced policies which mirror the objectives of the GDA system of labeling to help consumers make the “smart” choice quickly. For example, the European Union takes the same approach as Thailand, basing its guidelines on the latest published scientific data on dietary requirements and recommendations. Similarly, the United States uses a voluntary Facts Up Front labeling system, which calls for a summary of calories, saturated fat, sodium, and sugar per serving on the front of various food and beverage products.

Singapore, on the other hand, uses the Healthier Choice Symbol, an interpretive nutrition logo which distinguishes products that are lower in saturated fat and trans fat, sodium, and sugar, but higher in whole grains, fiber, and other healthy nutrients. Nutrition guidelines are set according to each product category. There are 12 main product categories and more than 70 subcategories. In addition, there are variants including the Healthier Snack Symbol and the Healthier Ingredient Symbol.

Australia and New Zealand use the Daily Intake Guide and the Health Star Rating. The Daily Intake Guide is a voluntary scheme which uses a set of reference values for acceptable levels of intake for energy and a variety of nutrients, sugars, protein, fat, fiber, and sodium, to name a few. The Health Star Rating system was developed to make it easier for consumers to compare similarly packaged food and therefore make healthier decisions. It ranks products on a scale from half a star to five stars based on their nutritional profile which includes, for example, energy, saturated fat, and sodium. This system of labeling is a hybrid of the GDA system used by Thailand, the European Union, and the United States, as well as the Healthier Choice Symbol used by Singapore.

The Future of FOP Labeling

The food and beverage community has pushed to revamp the current FOP labeling scheme in Thailand. Currently, the National Food Committee, a subcommittee of the Thai FDA, is working to add to the present FOP GDA labeling scheme, but the additions have yet to be announced. It is known, however, that use of the new FOP label will be voluntary and presently it is only being considered for certain foods. Some organizations are looking for inspiration in the “traffic light” nutritional labeling system, a system that uses the colors red, amber, and green to indicate high, acceptable, and low levels of fat, saturated fats, sugar, and salt in various products. Foods with “green” indicators are healthier than foods with “red” indicators, while foods with “amber” indicators fall in between.

The Federation of Thai Industries Food Group has supported the use of GDA nutrition labels and is determined to become involved in educating consumers about the GDA system of labeling. It prefers the GDA system of labeling to a color-coded system or an interpretive nutritional logo because these are sometimes misleading and vague and often do not comprehensively take into account different nutritional needs.

The good news is that the industry has been invited to participate in the development of a new scheme which producers can both contribute to and benefit from. With the correct industry input, FOP labeling should offer consumers informative nutritional information that is apt for a fast-paced world.

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

July 13, 2026
Indonesia’s Halal Product Assurance Agency (BPJPH) has issued new regulations establishing clearer procedures for imposing administrative sanctions on businesses that violate halal product assurance requirements. BPJPH Regulation No. 2 of 2026 on the Imposition of Administrative Sanctions for Violations of Halal Product Assurance Implementation, issued on June 5, 2026, strengthens Indonesia’s halal compliance framework, as mandated under Law No. 33 of 2014 on Halal Product Assurance and Government Regulation No. 42 of 2024 on the Implementation of Halal Product Assurance. BPJPH Regulation No. 2/2026 also supports the upcoming mandatory halal compliance deadline of October 17, 2026, which will apply to a broad range of products and services, including imported food and beverages, slaughtering products and services, natural and quasi-drugs, health supplements, cosmetics, chemical and genetically engineered products, clothing and accessories, household goods, prayer equipment, stationery, and class A medical devices. Scope BPJPH is authorized to impose administrative sanctions for violations of halal product assurance requirements committed by businesses, halal inspection agencies (LPH), halal auditors, halal product process companion institutions (lembaga pendamping PPH), and halal product process companions (pendamping PPH). The head of BPJPH has authority to determine, cancel, or amend the imposition of administrative sanctions, including upon receipt of objections. This authority covers revocation of Halal Certificates (including foreign halal certificate registration numbers), withdrawal of goods from circulation, freezing of LPH operations, freezing of halal product process companion institutions, revocation of PPH companion institution registration numbers, revocation of halal auditor registration numbers, and revocation of LPH accreditation status. Administrative Sanctions Businesses may be subject to any of the following administrative sanctions: Written warning; Administrative fine; Revocation of the halal certificate, including revocation of foreign halal certificate registration numbers; and Withdrawal of goods from circulation. The regulation sets out the types of violations that may trigger these sanctions, with each
July 1, 2026
Obtaining marketing authorization is a fundamental requirement for bringing pharmaceutical products to the Thai market. Companies must navigate the Thai Food and Drug Administration’s registration procedures while also complying with post-approval pharmacovigilance obligations, licensing requirements for manufacturing and importation, data protection rules, and other regulatory requirements. This guide provides an overview of Thailand’s regulatory framework for pharmaceutical marketing authorization, including available registration pathways, review timelines, application fees, postmarketing surveillance obligations, licensing requirements, exemptions, data exclusivity, freedom of information, and parallel import considerations. It is intended as a practical reference for pharmaceutical companies, regulatory affairs professionals, and others involved in bringing medicinal products to the Thai market. Download the guide below for a concise overview of the current requirements and procedures governing pharmaceutical marketing authorization in Thailand.
June 24, 2026
Patent enablement requirements are provided under Article 102 of Vietnam’s Law on Intellectual Property (IP Law). In particular, a patent specification must “fully and clearly disclose the nature of the invention to such an extent that, based on the specification, a person having ordinary skill in the relevant art can implement the invention.” In pharmaceutical and biotechnology patents, this requirement is more complicated and subject to more rigorous assessment. The Patent Examination Guidelines (Guidelines) of the Intellectual Property Office of Vietnam (IP Office) were amended in March 2026 to introduce Annexes III and IV for the pharmaceutical and biotechnology sectors, in which Annex III provides detailed guidelines on the assessment of specification requirements. These amendments were made under a project for strengthening capacity in industrial property examination between the Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA) and the IP Office. Annex III provides detailed instructions on how examiners assess enablement in a pharmaceutical or biotechnology application, and offers examples of acceptable and unacceptable descriptions with regard to the enablement aspect. Enablement Requirements in Pharma and Biotech Patents Article 12.7 of Circular 10/2026/TT-BKHCN (Circular 10) adds to the requirements of Article 102 of the IP Law that the description must demonstrate the novelty, inventive step, and industrial applicability of the technical solution. For pharmaceutical composition subject matters, Article 12.9 of Circular 10 sets out that the description must present the results of clinical trials and/or the pharmacological effects of the claimed pharmaceutical composition, and must include at least the following information: Substance/mixture used. Testing method (system) employed. Information on the test results. Correlation between the pharmacological effects obtained from the tests and the application of the pharmaceutical product in the prevention, diagnosis, and treatment of diseases. The Guidelines note that pharmacological study results should be presented in a quantified manner, and pharmacological
June 19, 2026
For the first time, Thailand’s Food and Drug Administration (FDA) has published a consolidated list identifying all substances that have successfully passed its novel food safety evaluation process. The list is a step forward in regulatory transparency, but it also highlights a feature of the Thai regime that food companies often overlook: each approval is tied exclusively to the company that applied for it. A substance’s appearance on the list does not give other companies the green light to use it. This article examines the structure of Thailand’s novel food approval framework, the implications of applicant exclusivity, and the strategic choices it requires of food companies looking to bring novel ingredients to the Thai market. Thai FDA Food Safety Evaluation Framework Notification No. 376 of the Ministry of Public Health requires novel food substances to undergo a food safety assessment, with an exemption only for novel foods manufactured exclusively for export. The framework also encompasses “foods that do not qualify as novel foods” but which present characteristics warranting a safety evaluation, such as differing quality standards, increased serving sizes, or applications in specific food categories, where such changes affect consumption levels, nutritional value, or consumer safety. The recently published list of foods that passed the safety evaluation by the Thai FDA is structured by substance category and identifies the approved company (domestic manufacturer or importer), country of origin, substance name and trade name, approved purpose of use, and date of the Thai FDA’s approval notification certificate. A notable feature of Thailand’s novel food regime is that the approval result is tied exclusively to the company that submitted the application. Publication of the consolidated list does not constitute a general authorization to use the approved substances. The Thai FDA’s approval certificate specifies the approved conditions of use and the requirements