|
REPORT FROM THE COMMISSION TO THE COUNCIL
on the application of Article 5 of Council Regulation (EC) No 2991/94
of 5 December 1994 laying down standards for spreadable fats
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1. Background
Council Regulation (EC) No 2991/94 laying down standards for spreadable
fats was adopted on 5 December 1994 against the background of:
– a market in solid fats intended for human consumption which
was becoming increasingly more diversified as a result of the development
of production techniques and changes in consumer expectations.
– the similarity of the products covered, from the point of
view of appearance and use, which made them competing products.
In order to create a legal framework which would contribute to the
development of trade under conditions of fair competition, make
it easier for the consumer to choose and avoid confusion, a uniform
classification was established for all the products concerned.
This classification incorporates two factors which allow a comparison
and a distinction to be drawn:
– fat content (which is the essential constituent of such
products)
– milk or non-milk, vegetable or animal origin.
For each of the products resulting from the classification, a reserved
sales description was laid down.
The sales description thus makes it possible to identify a product
with a given fat content and origin while complying with two criteria
(Annex I takes over the classification laid down in Regulation (EC)
No 2991/94):
1. Restrict use of the terms "butter" and "margarine"
and, by analogy, the term "blend" to certain categories
of products with the highest fat content (not less than 80% but
less than 90%)
2. For other categories, the reduced fat content must be included
in the description by using the terms "three-quarter-fat",
"half-fat" or "fat spread X%"
In addition to the second criterion, the option of using terms implying
a reduced-fat content is provided for by Article 5(2), the application
of which is the subject of this report.
1.2. Article 5, terms implying a reduced fat content.
Article 5 of Regulation (EC) No 2991/94 laying down standards for
spreadable fats specifies the following:
"1. Terms for products referred to in the Annex which state,
imply or suggest fat content other than those referred to in that
Annex shall be prohibited.
2. By way of derogation from paragraph 1 and in addition:
a) the term 'reduced-fat' may be used for products referred to in
the Annex with a fat content of more than 41 % but not more than
62 %;
b) the terms 'low-fat' or 'light' may be used for products referred
to in the Annex with a fat content of 41 % or less.
The term 'reduced-fat' and the terms 'low-fat' or 'light' may, however,
replace respectively the terms 'three-quarter-fat' or 'half-fat'
used in the Annex.
Within five years of the date of entry into force of this Regulation
the Council shall review the application of this paragraph on the
basis of a report by the Commission."
2. QUESTIONNAIRE :
For the purpose of drawing up this report, a questionnaire (see
Annex) was prepared by the Commission and sent to the Member States
so that their experience and perception of the Community system
concerned could be taken into account.
There were two groups of questions:
– Questions on production. It was necessary to know what percentage
of all yellowfat products was accounted for by reduced-fat products
in order to gauge the interest shown by consumers in purchasing
this type of product.
– Questions concerning the use of claims implying a reduced
fat content. The purpose of these questions was, first, to assess
the interest shown by manufacturers and distributors in using the
terms covered by the report and, second, to identify the problems
which had arisen in applying the specifications relating to the
claims.
Member States' answers were taken into account in drafting this
report.
3. MARKETING OF SPREADABLE FATS IN THE EUROPEAN UNION. DYNAMISM,
COMPLEXITY AND DIVERSITY OF THE SECTOR.
In order to determine what volume of reduced-fat products was placed
on the market and what percentage of all products covered by Council
Regulation (EC) No 2991/94 was accounted for by them, Member States
were requested to supply the requisite data.
The absence of reliable statistics, the dynamism of the market and
the fact that some Member States argued that the data was confidential
made it impossible to obtain precise information. Since the information
transmitted by certain Member States was limited in some respects,
we had to use other sources which could serve to draw up this report.
In any event, as a result of the effort made by most Member States
in supplying the production and/or marketing figures available,
it was possible to arrive at the following conclusions:
– The spreadable fats sector is highly dynamic, with new products
constantly being introduced.
– The market in these products has become greatly diversified:
many products with a changing milk and non-milk fat composition
and a variable fat content are placed on the market.
– Far fewer reduced-fat milk products are marketed than other
products not derived exclusively from milk.
– The market is characterised by its plurality, with wide
gaps between Member States.
Some differences lie in the origin of the raw material: in some
Member States, such as Spain, Portugal and Greece, vegetable fats
predominate, while use of milk fats is traditionally rather limited.
This is not the case in Belgium, France, Germany and Denmark, where
substantially more butterfat is sold.
There are also differences in the volume of reduced-fat products
marketed. Despite the disparity between Member States, however,
there is one common trait: low-fat products have gained a significant
share of the market everywhere.
4. IMPLEMENTATION OF ARTICLE 5 OF REGULATION (EC) NO 2991/94
4.1. Use of the claim "reduced-fat"
It was noted that the term "reduced-fat", or the alternative
term provided for in some languages (e.g. allégé in
French), is used throughout the European Union.
The term chosen varies according to the Member State: both terms
are used in France and Greece, the alternative is used in Belgium
and Italy, while in the other countries "reduced-fat"
is used.
4.2. Use of the claims "low-fat" or "light"
The terms which suggest a low fat content are used by all Member
States marketing this type of product, the choice of term and intensity
of use varying according to the country, as is demonstrated by the
table below.
| Member States marketing this type of product |
Low-fat |
English term "light" |
national languae equivalent of "light" |
| France |
x |
x |
x |
| Spain |
x |
x |
x |
| Germany |
x |
x |
x |
| Portugal |
x |
x |
x |
| Finland |
|
x |
|
| Sweden |
|
x |
|
| Netherlands (1) |
x |
x |
|
| United Kingdom |
|
x |
x |
| Belgium |
|
|
x |
| Austria |
|
|
x |
| Greece |
x |
|
|
| Denmark |
|
|
x (2) |
| Ireland |
x |
x |
x |
(1) In the Netherlands, "half-fat" is
the term used in marketing milk fats with a fat content of no less
than 39% and no more than 41%. For non-milk products, on the other
hand, the terms "halvarine" or "light" are commonly
used as a sales description.
(2) Used as a complement to minarine.
4.3. Problems connected with the application
of Article 5(2).
Neither traders nor the national authorities responsible for implementing
the provisions of the paragraph in question have experienced any
practical problems in applying Article 5(2) anywhere in the European
Union.
One country alone - the United Kingdom - pointed out that there
had been some confusion on the part of manufacturers and consumers
between the use of the provisions of Regulation (EC) No 2991/94
and the use of the terms "low-fat" or "light"
for other food products.
4.4. Article 5(2) as a response to traders' and consumers' requirements.
On the whole, the option of using the terms implying a reduced or
low fat content, as provided for in Article 5(2), meets the requirements
of manufacturers, distributors and consumers. Such was the view
expressed by the Member States. Similarly, there was a desire to
maintain the terms concerned.
However, perceptions of this kind of term are not homogeneous:
On the one hand, there are countries which are more accustomed to
using the general terms "half-fat" or "three-quarter-fat".
Germany is one such example.
On the other hand, there are countries where the terms "half-fat"
or "three-quarter-fat" are less widespread and, in some
cases, are not used at all, so that the terms "reduced-fat",
"low-fat" and "light" are commonly used in marketing
this type of product. Such is the case, for example, with France.
The choice between the general sales descriptions "half-fat"
or "three-quarter-fat" and the optional terms forming
the subject-matter of this report varies and reflects an attempt
to continue to use the terms which have become more familiar to
consumers on account of their use in the past.
It was noted that, on the whole, the terms covered by this report
provide information which is clearly understood by the consumer.
4.5. Other aspects to be considered.
Although no problems were raised in connection with the application
of Article 5(2), several aspects requiring improvement were identified:
– Specific indication of the fat content in addition to the
mandatory terms.
Some delegations believe that including the fat content in the labelling
or in the sales description would avoid confusion on the part of
consumers (Sweden, Germany, Finland, United Kingdom). However, this
is already provided for in Article 3(1). According to this Article,
sales descriptions must be accompanied by an indication of the fat
content and of the vegetable or animal origin, so that consumers
are fully informed about the nature and composition of the product.
– Change in general sales descriptions.
Some delegations (Portugal, Italy, Greece, Germany, Finland, United
Kingdom, Ireland, Belgium) find that the general sales descriptions
laid down in Regulation (EC) No 2991/94 are not the most appropriate,
either because they are not readily accepted by consumers or because
consumers do not have sufficiently clear information about the nature
of these products. A variety of amendments is proposed:
Germany and Ireland wish to continue to use the descriptions "half-fat
margarine" and "three-quarter-fat margarine", but
suggest replacing the description "fat spread X%" with
"margarine X%".
The United Kingdom also suggests that all products should be labelled
consistently so that sales descriptions for products in the same
group are the same and the difference between two products in the
same group lies in the fat content declaration. The proposed descriptions
are therefore "dairy spread X%", "fat spread X%"
and "blended spread X%". For products which fall into
the 39-41% and 60-62% bands, the terms "half-fat" and
"three-quarter-fat" could be used as an optional addition
to the mandatory sales description and fat content declaration.
Finland proposes that the permitted sales descriptions should be:
"butter X%", "margarine X%" and "blended
spread X%".
Italy proposes replacing the description "fat spread X%"
with "vegetable condiment X%" or "vegetable margarine
X%".
Portugal suggests that the sales descriptions "dairy spread
X%", "fat spread X%" and "blended spread X%"
should be translated into Portuguese as "dairy cream spread
X%", "cream spread X%" and "blended cream spread
X%".
Greece also proposes changing the description "fat spread X%"
to "margarine X%" and "blended spread X%" to
"margarine and butter spread X%" or "blended margarine
and butter spread X%".
Finally, Belgium believes that some translations do not convey the
nuances expressed by the terms used in other languages.
– Abolition of the optional use of certain terms.
Two Member States suggest abolishing the option available to traders
of marketing their products using certain terms provided for in
Article 5(2) of Regulation (EC) No 2991/94, i.e.:
– Denmark proposes abolishing the optional use of two terms
which are not used by Danish traders. The terms in question are
"reduced-fat" and "low-fat".
– The United Kingdom considers that terms implying a low fat
content should be applied in a uniform manner to all foods and that
the course of action followed should be that provided by Codex.
Since the Codex guidelines lay down that terms implying a low fat
content may be used only when the fat content of food products does
not exceed 3%, the United Kingdom considers that such terms should
not be applied to products covered by Regulation (EC) No 2991/94.
However, the use of terms implying a low fat content in connection
with products with a fat content of between 10% and 90% is justified
since this type of claim must not be considered out of context;
on the contrary, such terms must be defined by reference to full
fat products (butter, margarine and blends).
5. CONCLUSIONS
After studying the information received from the Member States as
well as the Commission's own information, the following conclusions
can be drawn:
1. The information received from Member States on the volume of
yellowfats produced and/or marketed is not sufficient to provide
a full picture of the market situation of such products.
Furthermore, the frequent introduction of new products, the lack
of reliable statistics and statistical secrecy on the part of producers
have contributed to making it difficult to obtain information.
However, the information gathered indicates that the volume of reduced-fat
or low-fat products marketed has increased at the expense of more
traditional products.
2. Application of the provisions on general sales descriptions laid
down in Regulation (EC) No 2991/94 and application of the provisions
on terms suggesting a reduced-fat content laid down in Article 5(2)
of that Regulation have made it possible to clarify the sales descriptions
of the products marketed without curbing the dynamic growth of the
sector.
Firms have acquired the know-how required to comply with the rules.
Where the terms implying a reduced fat content are concerned, the
existence of two options - using only the terms "half-fat",
"three-quarter-fat" and "fat spread X%" laid
down in Article 5(1), or replacing them or adding the terms "reduced-fat",
"low-fat" or "light" - makes it possible to
meet the needs of traders and consumers who are more familiar with
one or other type of sales description according to the country
involved.
By the same token, it has been noted that all the terms covered
by this report are used, although the choice of terms varies from
one country to another.
Furthermore, the efforts made by producers to create and/or consolidate
their market by using terms implying a reduced fat content certainly
must be taken into consideration in assessing the application of
those terms.
3. Neither the competent national authorities nor
traders have reported any problems in applying the provisions laid
down in Article 5(2) of Regulation (EC) No 2991/94.
4. The competent national authorities gave a positive
assessment of the performance of the terms laid down in Article
5(2) of Regulation (EC) No 2991/94. In their view, the terms meet
manufacturers', distributors' and consumers' requirements.
Such terms as "reduced-fat", "low-fat" or "light"
are familiar to consumers. By implying a reduced fat content, they
make it possible to distinguish this type of product from "butter"
and "margarine", which have a clearly-defined, full-fat
content.
5. The aim of the report, as laid down in Regulation (EC) No 2991/94,
was to serve as a basis for examining the application of the terms
"reduced-fat", "low-fat" and "light".
However, the suggested amendments to other elements have been carefully
examined and the following conclusions have been drawn:
First, the Commission has received no communication, since the entry
into force of Regulation (EC) No 2991/94, which might give the impression
that problems have arisen in connection with the use of the general
sales descriptions. Consequently, it is not necessary to amend the
general sales descriptions laid down in that Regulation.
Second, the amendments which some Member States suggest should be
made to the general sales descriptions are disparate and focus too
closely on individual situations.
6. To sum up, not only has the application of Article 5(2) of Council
Regulation (EC) No 2991/94 given rise to no problems, but it has
proven to be effective in contributing, together with the general
descriptions, towards creating a framework of Community rules which
incorporates and clarifies the range of sales descriptions and terms
used throughout the European Union.
Since no problems have arisen in applying them and their effectiveness
has been proven, it is inconceivable that the terms should be abolished,
which would only confuse consumers and traders alike.
The application of terms implying a reduced or low fat content may,
of course, be reviewed in the light of developments at Community
level in legislation on the standardisation of claims for food products.
ANNEX
QUESTIONNAIRE
The Commission is to send the Council a report on the application
of Article 5(2) of Regulation (EC) No 2991/94 regarding the use
of terms implying a low fat content.
To that end, we must know what percentage of all spreadable fats
is accounted for by low-fat products and the interest shown by the
manufacturers and distributors in using the terms covered by the
report.
A. Production of reduced-fat spreadable fats.
Specify production for 1998 and 1999 in tonnes by group of products
and by fat content.
Groups of products listed in the Annex to Regulation (EC) No 2991/94
| |
Milk fats |
Fats |
Fats composed of plant
and/or animal products |
| Fat content |
1998 |
1999 |
1998 |
1999 |
1998 |
1999 |
Not less than
10% and not
more than 41% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
More than 41%
but not
more than 62% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
More than 62%
but less
than 90% |
|
|
|
|
|
|
B. Use of claims implying a reduced-fat content.
1. Are spreadable fats with a fat content of more than 41% but not
more than 62% marketed in your country?
1.1. If so, is the term “reduced-fat” added to the sales
description? Is this always the case? Sometimes?
1.2. In the case of products with a fat content of not less than
60% but not more than 62%, is the term “three-quarter-fat”
replaced by “reduced-fat”? If so, is this always the
case? Sometimes?
2. Are spreadable fats with a fat content of not more than 41% marketed
in your country?
2.1. If so, are the terms “low-fat” or “light”
added to the sales description? Which term? Is this always the case?
Sometimes?
2.2. In the case of products with a fat content of not less than
39% but not more than 41%, is the term “half-fat” replaced
by “low-fat” or “light”? If so, by which
term? Is this always the case? Sometimes?
3. Since the entry into force of Regulation (EC) No 2991/94 the
Commission has received no reports of problems arising in the application
of Article 5(2) of that Regulation. To your knowledge:
– Have the competent authorities experienced any problems
in applying that Article? If so, please give details.
– Have traders reported any difficulties in application? If
so, what are they?
4. Do you think that the provisions of Article 5(2) meet the needs
of manufacturers, distributors and consumers? If not, how could
they be improved?
5. According to Article 5(2), the term “reduced-fat”
can be used for products with a fat content of more than 41% but
not more than 62%.
However, there are various options depending on the fat content:
– In the case of products with a fat content of not less than
60% but not more than 62%, the term “reduced-fat” can
either be added to or replace the sales description “three-quarter-fat”.
– The term can, however, be added to, but not replace, the
description of products with a fat content of more than 41% but
less than 60%.
This also applies to the terms “low-fat” and “light”.
Do you think that proposing two different options in applying those
terms, depending on whether a narrow range (60-62%) or a wide range
(42-62%) is involved, causes confusion?
– If so, what amendments should be made?
– If not, have these terms sufficed?
6. Do you have any other comments?

|
 |