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

Subscribe to Updates
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.

Download Full Article
Related Professionals

Industries

Life Sciences

Practices

Regulatory Affairs

Location

RELATED INSIGHTS​ 

January 5, 2026
On December 31, 2025, Vietnam’s Ministry of Health (MOH) issued Circular No. 57/2025/TT-BYT providing guidance on the classification of medical devices according to technical standards and quality requirements (Circular 57), applicable to procurement activities for medical devices in Vietnam. According to the MOH, the purpose of the classification is to establish a principle-based legal framework and regulations that enable purchasers to easily identify groups of medical devices aligned with their professional requirements and financial capacity. Some of the key stipulations of Circular 57 are outlined below. Basis for Determining Technical Standards and Quality Under Circular 57, the technical standards of medical devices are determined in accordance with Vietnamese laws on standards and technical regulations, through the following means: Certification of conformity with standards in accordance with Vietnamese laws on standards and technical regulations; Results of conformity assessment conducted by an internationally recognized conformity assessment organization or a legally established domestic or foreign conformity assessment organization operating in Vietnam; and Documentation evidencing compliance provided by the medical device owner. The quality of medical devices is determined based on whether the device has been approved for circulation by the relevant marketing authority of one or more jurisdictions. Classification of Medical Devices Circular 57 classifies medical devices into six groups (from Group 1 to Group 6) based on technical standards and quality. Medical devices subject to classification must simultaneously meet technical standards and quality requirements in accordance with professional specifications and user needs, and must be lawfully marketed in Vietnam. Medical devices manufactured in Vietnam may participate in all corresponding groups, provided they meet the technical standards required by the user and are lawfully marketed in Vietnam. Outlook Circular No. 57 will take effect on February 15, 2026, while the classification requirements will become effective on January 1, 2027. Holders of medical
Read More
December 30, 2025
The Intellectual Property Office of Vietnam (IP Office), with support from the Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA), is drafting additional annexes to its Guidelines for Patent Examination, focusing on the examination of patent applications in the pharmaceutical and biotechnology sectors. The new annexes are expected to be officially issued in early 2026 as Annexes III and IV, following the successful issuance in 2023 of Annexes I and II addressing computer program-related inventions. The IP Office recently organized a seminar to gather feedback on the draft annexes from intellectual property representatives, academic institutions, research institutes, and other interested parties, emphasizing its intention to receive further constructive opinions to refine the guidelines for pharmaceuticals and biotechnology. Why These Guidelines Matter Patent examination in Vietnam has traditionally relied on the Guidelines for Patent Examination issued under Decision No. 487/QD-SHTT (2010), recently supplemented by Annexes I and II. While these documents provide a solid foundation, they do not fully address practical challenges in examining pharmaceutical and biotech inventions, particularly issues related to clarity, sufficiency of disclosure, enablement, features of function and utility, combination therapies, and inventions involving artificial intelligence (AI) applications in these fields. Annexes III and IV aim to close these gaps by introducing structured principles and illustrative examples. Guidance on Patent Specification Requirements Annex III provides detailed guidance on the requirements for patent specifications in pharmaceuticals and biotechnology, covering two main parts: Part A addresses sufficiency of disclosure, clarity of specifications, and consistency between claims and descriptions. Part B covers inventions related to Markush-type compounds, claims containing exclusion statements (disclaimers), and additional experimental data submitted during examination. The Guidelines outline specific disclosure requirements for subject matters such as compounds, formulations, pharmaceutical compositions, genes, polypeptides, proteins, vectors, transgenic organisms, modified organisms, and hybrid cells. Annex III emphasizes that disclaimers are not accepted
Read More
November 25, 2025
Food safety incidents can emerge without warning, requiring businesses to act swiftly to protect consumers and comply with regulatory obligations. Across Southeast Asia, Thailand, Vietnam, and Indonesia have each developed comprehensive food recall frameworks designed to ensure rapid removal of unsafe products from the market while holding businesses accountable for compliance failures. While these three jurisdictions share common objectives—protecting public health and ensuring food safety—each has crafted distinct regulatory approaches reflecting their unique administrative structures, enforcement priorities, and legal traditions. Understanding these differences is essential for food businesses operating in the region, as recall procedures, timelines, reporting requirements, and penalties vary significantly across borders. This guide, available through the button below, examines the food recall regulations in Indonesia, Thailand, and Vietnam, providing practical guidance on legal requirements, procedural steps, and compliance obligations in each market.
Read More