{"id":1914,"date":"2026-07-27T07:09:37","date_gmt":"2026-07-27T07:09:37","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.fratinivergano.eu\/en\/?post_type=trade-perspectives&#038;p=1914"},"modified":"2026-07-27T07:09:38","modified_gmt":"2026-07-27T07:09:38","slug":"27-july-2026","status":"publish","type":"trade-perspectives","link":"https:\/\/www.fratinivergano.eu\/en\/trade-perspectives\/27-july-2026\/","title":{"rendered":"27 July 2026"},"content":{"rendered":"\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li><strong><a href=\"#EU\">European Commission issues Guidelines on the EU\u2019s Forced Labour Regulation: Towards effective enforcement?<\/a><\/strong><\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><strong><a href=\"#Thailand\">Origin circumvention on the rise? Thailand strengthens controls over a list of \u2018<em>surveillance goods<\/em>\u2019 exported to the US under non-preferential trade regimes<\/a><\/strong><\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><a href=\"applewebdata:\/\/F1D8CE88-2404-482E-887C-A8FE2180591A#_The_EU_discusses\"><strong>I<\/strong><\/a><strong><a href=\"#Indonesia\">ndonesia updates its regulatory framework for food packaging: Advancing food safety and sustainability?<\/a><\/strong><\/li>\n\n\n\n<li><strong><a href=\"#Legislation\">Recently adopted EU legislation<\/a><\/strong><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><strong><em>Note to Subscribers<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><em>Dear Friends and Readers of Trade Perspectives<sup>\u00a9<\/sup>,<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><em>Please note that Trade Perspectives<sup>\u00a9<\/sup>&nbsp;will take an editorial break during the WTO\u2019s August recess and will resume its fortnightly publication schedule on 7 September 2026. We thank you for your continued interest in Trade Perspectives<sup>\u00a9<\/sup>and look forward to resuming our dialogues on international trade, food law, and EU and ASEAN developments with renewed energy and enthusiasm this Autumn.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><em>FratiniVergano\u2019s Trade Perspectives<sup>\u00a9<\/sup>&nbsp;Team<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n<h1 id=\"EU\" class=\"wp-block-heading\">European Commission issues Guidelines on the EU\u2019s Forced Labour Regulation: Towards effective enforcement?<\/h1>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><strong><em>By Florette Peter, Stella Nalwoga<\/em><\/strong><strong><em>,&nbsp;<\/em><\/strong><strong><em>and Tobias Dolle<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><a><\/a>On 26 June 2026, the European Commission (hereinafter, Commission) published non-binding&nbsp;<a href=\"https:\/\/webgate.ec.europa.eu\/circabc-ewpp\/d\/d\/workspace\/SpacesStore\/3b159733-6cdf-4f9e-8b30-80580c0679d8\/download\"><em>Guidelines<\/em><\/a>&nbsp;regarding the application of&nbsp;<a href=\"https:\/\/eur-lex.europa.eu\/eli\/reg\/2024\/3015\/oj\/eng\"><em>Regulation (EU) 2024\/3015 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 27 November 2024 on prohibiting products made with forced labour on the Union market and amending Directive (EU) 2019\/1937<\/em><\/a>&nbsp;(hereinafter, Forced Labour Regulation). With the Forced Labour Regulation set to apply from 14 December 2027, the publication of the Guidelines marks an important step towards its implementation, notably by clarifying how the Commission expects economic operators and competent authorities to apply the new rules in practice.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">This article provides an overview of the EU\u2019s regulatory framework on forced labour, the Commission\u2019s&nbsp;<em>Guidelines<\/em>, and assesses the underlying trade-related concerns and implications for businesses.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><strong><em>The EU\u2019s regulatory framework on forced labour&nbsp;<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">On 12 December 2024, the EU had published the Forced Labour Regulation, which turns the EU\u2019s human\u2011rights commitments and international labour standards regarding forced labour into enforceable obligations by&nbsp;<em>\u201cprohibiting economic operators from placing and making available on the Union market or exporting from the Union market products made with forced labour\u201d<\/em>. The Regulation will apply to all products and components, regardless of origin or sector, made with forced labour at any stage of their supply chain,<em>&nbsp;\u201cthat are placed or made available on the EU market as from 14 December 2027, even if the products or their components were produced or imported into the EU before that date\u201d<\/em>. Products&nbsp;<em>\u201coffered online or through other means of distance sales\u201d,<\/em>&nbsp;when&nbsp;<em>\u201ctargeted at end users in the EU\u201d,&nbsp;<\/em>also fall within the scope of the Regulation. While the&nbsp;<em>Forced Labour Regulation<\/em>\u2019s approach is clear, many operational questions remain (see&nbsp;<em>Trade Perspectives,&nbsp;<\/em><a href=\"https:\/\/www.fratinivergano.eu\/en\/trade-perspectives\/25-march-2024\/#Products%20made%20with%20forced%20labour\">Issue No. 6 of 25 March 2024<\/a>).<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">In recent times, the Commission has progressively established the framework envisaged by the&nbsp;<em>Forced Labour Regulation<\/em>, including by adopting&nbsp;<a href=\"https:\/\/eur-lex.europa.eu\/eli\/reg_impl\/2026\/903\/oj\/eng\"><em>Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2026\/903 of 24 April 2026 specifying the details and functionalities of the information and communication system to be used for the purposes of Regulation (EU) 2024\/3015 of the European Parliament and of the Council<\/em><\/a>, which establishes a dedicated module in the EU\u2019s&nbsp;<em>Information and Communication System for Market Surveillance<\/em>&nbsp;(ICSMS) for purposes of facilitating cooperation between the Commission, EU Member States\u2019 competent authorities and Customs authorities, as well as by launching the&nbsp;<a href=\"https:\/\/single-market-economy.ec.europa.eu\/single-market\/goods\/forced-labour-regulation_en\"><em>Forced Labour Single Portal<\/em><\/a>, which serves as a central hub for related materials and tools and links to the&nbsp;<em>Single Information Submission Point<\/em>, allowing individuals and organisations to \u201c<em>share information about products or companies potentially linked to forced labour with a connection to the EU market<\/em>\u201d from 14 December 2027. The Commission is still developing the&nbsp;<a href=\"https:\/\/single-market-economy.ec.europa.eu\/single-market\/goods\/forced-labour-regulation\/which-products-and-areas-are-risk-forced-labour_en\">forced labour risk database<\/a>, which would provide information on products and geographical areas where forced labour risks have been documented in credible, publicly available sources.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><strong><em>Key clarifications introduced by the Guidelines<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The Commission\u2019s 2026 Guidelines&nbsp;<em>\u201cbuild on and supersede\u201d<\/em>&nbsp;the&nbsp;<a href=\"https:\/\/circabc.europa.eu\/rest\/download\/de3d9ab5-dca1-4037-aeb8-8704a379c67b\"><em>2021 Guidance on Due Diligence for EU Businesses to Address the Risk of Forced Labour in their Operations and Supply Chains<\/em><\/a>, in order to promote consistent application of the&nbsp;<em>Forced Labour Regulation<\/em>&nbsp;across EU Member States. The Commission emphasises that the&nbsp;<em>Guidelines<\/em>&nbsp;do not introduce additional obligations, but rather seek to&nbsp;<em>\u201chelp economic operators to be at a lower risk of having forced labour in their operations and supply chains\u201d<\/em>. The&nbsp;<em>Guidelines<\/em>&nbsp;provide detailed guidance on the scope of the&nbsp;<em>Forced Labour Regulation<\/em>, the application of its risk-based approach, due diligence expectations, evidentiary requirements, investigative procedures, and the mechanisms for cooperation and information-sharing between the Commission, EU Member States, and Customs authorities.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The&nbsp;<em>Forced Labour Regulation<\/em>&nbsp;does not define forced labour, but instead incorporates by reference the definition contained in the International Labour Organization (ILO) Forced Labour Convention, 1930 (No. 29), under which forced labour consists of \u201c<em>work or services performed involuntarily and under coercion<\/em>\u201d. The&nbsp;<em>Guidelines<\/em>&nbsp;explain that coercion may take many forms, including violence, restrictions on movement, debt bondage, withholding of wages or identity documents, intimidation, and threats, such as threats of dismissal or deportation. The&nbsp;<em>Guidelines<\/em>&nbsp;further distinguish between privately imposed forced labour and State-imposed forced labour (SIFL), the latter involving coercion by State authorities or entities exercising State-like powers. The&nbsp;<em>Guidelines<\/em>&nbsp;emphasise that State-imposed forced labour is typically systemic, affects large numbers of workers and, because of its scale and severity, is likely to receive the highest enforcement priority under the risk-based approach.&nbsp;<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The&nbsp;<em>Forced Labour Regulation<\/em>&nbsp;will require competent authorities to follow a risk-based approach when deciding which products and economic operators to prioritise for investigation. The&nbsp;<em>Guidelines<\/em>&nbsp;explain that the purpose of this approach is to ensure that enforcement resources be focused on cases presenting the highest risk and delivering the greatest potential impact. To identify products and prioritise cases for investigation, the competent authorities are to assess three criteria: 1) The scale and severity of the suspected forced labour, including whether State-imposed forced labour is involved; 2) The quantity or volume of products placed or made available on the EU market; and 3) The significance of the component within the final product that is suspected of having been made with forced labour. In determining which economic operators to investigate, authorities are also to consider the operator\u2019s proximity to the alleged forced labour, the available leverage to prevent or remedy the situation, the operator\u2019s size and economic resources, and the complexity of the relevant supply chain.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">In addition to the risk-based approach to identify and take enforcement action against products associated with forced labour risks, the&nbsp;<em>Forced Labour Regulation<\/em>&nbsp;places strong emphasis on international cooperation, encouraging structured engagement with third countries through existing bilateral dialogues, trade agreements, and development cooperation. These mechanisms provide an opportunity for trading partners to demonstrate domestic efforts to combat forced labour and to reduce the likelihood that products or geographical areas would be identified by the EU as presenting heightened risks.&nbsp;<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><strong><em>Cooperation obligations for companies under investigation<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The&nbsp;<em>Forced Labour Regulation<\/em>&nbsp;will require EU Member States\u2019 competent authorities to follow a step-by-step investigation process, starting with an initial assessment of whether a \u2018<em>substantiated concern<\/em>\u2019 exists, followed by a formal investigation that is normally to be completed within nine months, and which can lead to a decision imposing a market-wide prohibition applicable to all operators involved.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The&nbsp;<em>Guidelines<\/em>&nbsp;provide important practical details on the conduct of investigations and the evidence that authorities may request from economic operators at any stage of an investigation. These include details on their forced\u2011labour risk\u2011management actions, working conditions at the alleged site, and the products under assessment. More specifically, supply-chain traceability tools, trade and shipping documents, internal policies, social audit reports, and worker interviews are likely to be required.&nbsp;<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><strong><em>Risk mitigation through due diligence&nbsp;<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">In terms of due diligence by economic operators, Article 1(3) of the&nbsp;<em>Forced Labour Regulation<\/em>&nbsp;expressly provides that \u201c<em>the Regulation does not create additional due diligence obligations for economic operators other than those already provided for in Union or national law<\/em>\u201d, which merely means that businesses will not face additional reporting obligations. The&nbsp;<em>Forced Labour Regulation<\/em>&nbsp;still recognises due diligence as&nbsp;<em>\u201ca useful tool to address forced labour in supply chains\u201d<\/em>and the&nbsp;<em>Guidelines<\/em>&nbsp;aim at clarifying how due diligence could&nbsp;<em>\u201chelp companies comply with the Regulation\u201d<\/em>&nbsp;and reduce the risk that their products become subject to enforcement action.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">In particular, the&nbsp;<em>Guidelines<\/em>&nbsp;recommend a risk-based and proportionate approach aligned with internationally recognised standards, notably the&nbsp;<em>Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development<\/em>\u2019s (OECD)&nbsp;<a href=\"https:\/\/www.oecd.org\/en\/publications\/oecd-due-diligence-guidance-for-responsible-business-conduct_15f5f4b3-en.html\">six-step due diligence guidance<\/a>, integrated into existing corporate compliance systems. The&nbsp;<em>Guidelines<\/em>&nbsp;emphasise that due diligence should be an ongoing process encompassing risk identification, prevention, mitigation, monitoring and, where necessary, remediation.&nbsp;<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><strong><em>Compliance roadmap<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">To prepare for compliance with the&nbsp;<em>Forced Labour Regulation<\/em>, businesses may have to enhance their supply-chain scrutiny and traceability. The&nbsp;<em>Guidelines<\/em>&nbsp;make clear that operators must be able to promptly demonstrate traceability down to the site of production and provide credible verification of labour conditions. Customs authorities will play a central role in enforcing these investigative steps, potentially leading to delays, shipment suspensions or refusals at the EU borders.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The need to maintain extensive documentation, in order to prepare for investigations, may require new internal processes and resources. Businesses should assess their supply-chain governance and ensure that their compliance systems are capable of withstanding regulatory scrutiny before the&nbsp;<em>Forced Labour Regulation<\/em>&nbsp;becomes applicable on 14 December 2027.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><strong><em>For any additional information or legal advice on this matter, please contact Tobias Dolle&nbsp;<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<h1 id=\"Thailand\" class=\"wp-block-heading\">Origin circumvention on the rise? Thailand strengthens controls over a list of \u2018<em>surveillance goods<\/em>\u2019 exported to the US under non-preferential trade regimes<\/h1>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><strong><em>By Alya Mahira, Pattranit Chantaplaboon, and&nbsp;<\/em><\/strong><strong><em>Paolo R. Vergano<\/em><\/strong><strong><em><\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">On 1 June 2026, the&nbsp;<a href=\"https:\/\/ratchakitcha.soc.go.th\/documents\/114408.pdf\"><em>Notification of the Department of Foreign Trade Regarding the Verification of Origin of Goods for Issuing Non-Preferential Certificates of Origin for Surveillance Goods Exported to the US B.E. 2569<\/em><\/a>&nbsp;entered into force in Thailand. The&nbsp;<em>Notification&nbsp;<\/em>aims at strengthening controls over designated \u2018<em>surveillance goods\u2019<\/em>, which refers to goods subject to US anti-dumping measures and \u2018<em>reciprocal<\/em>\u2019 tariff circumvention. Under the&nbsp;<em>Notification<\/em>, these goods are now subject to mandatory origin verification by Thailand\u2019s&nbsp;<em>Department of Foreign Trade<\/em>&nbsp;(hereinafter, DFT), which is intended to ensure that the goods genuinely qualify as originating in Thailand and to prevent \u2018<em>origin washing<\/em>\u2019, which refers to a deceptive trade practice under which an exporter disguises the actual country where a product was manufactured to evade Customs duties, import restrictions, or trade barriers. According to the DFT, the&nbsp;<em>Notification<\/em>&nbsp;aims at safeguarding Thai export integrity, namely by preventing tariff evasion and the circumvention of trade measures.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">This article addresses the risk of origin circumvention in Thailand and within the broader Association of Southeast Asian Nations (hereinafter, ASEAN), provides an overview of the&nbsp;<em>Notification<\/em>, and highlights the implications for businesses.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><strong><em>Addressing the risk of origin circumvention<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Rules of origin refer to the legal framework used to determine the \u201c<em>nationality<\/em>\u201d of goods to apply trade measures, such as preferential duties, quotas, and anti-circumvention duties. A Certificate of Origin is the key document in international trade that certifies a product\u2019s country of origin. In recent years, certain ASEAN Member States, notably Thailand and Viet Nam, have faced heightened US scrutiny over transshipment practices, where traders misrepresent goods from certain origins, such as China, as local exports. By routing products through ASEAN Member States, without adding substantial value and indicating them as being of Thai or Vietnamese origin, certain traders purposefully circumvent US and EU anti-dumping duties or seek lower tariff rates under applicable preferential trading arrangements.&nbsp;<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">In order to address origin circumvention involving primarily Chinese goods, in 2022 the DFT introduced a mandatory requirement under which exporters of designated \u2018<em>surveillance goods\u2019<\/em>, referring to goods carrying a high risk of origin circumvention bound for the US or the EU, such as certain aluminium foil, honey, and wire rod, must obtain a product origin verification statement from the DFT prior to applying for a Non-Preferential Certificate of Origin. This DFT-issued verification statement serves as official certification that the exported goods are genuinely of Thai origin and do not involve fraudulent origin declarations.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><strong><em>Thailand\u2019s mandatory requirement to verify the origin of goods<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">In 2023, the requirement of product origin verification and the list of \u2018<em>surveillance goods<\/em>\u2019 were updated by the&nbsp;<a href=\"https:\/\/ratchakitcha.soc.go.th\/documents\/15670.pdf\"><em>Notification of the Department of Foreign Trade Regarding the Verification of Origin for Surveillance Goods B.E. 2566<\/em><\/a>&nbsp;(hereinafter, 2023 Notification), which provided,&nbsp;<em>inter alia<\/em>, for: 1) Rules for the verification procedure; 2) Documentary and submission requirements; 3) The validity period of verification results (<em>i.e.<\/em>, 2 years); and 4) Grounds for revoking a verification result. All exporters of covered goods, regardless of whether they manufacture the exported \u2018<em>surveillance goods<\/em>\u2019, must submit the following documents via the DFT\u2019s&nbsp;<em>Rules of Origin Verification System<\/em>&nbsp;(<em>i.e.<\/em>,&nbsp;<em>ROVERs PLUS<\/em>): 1) Official certification of manufacturing business operations issued by the Thai competent authority; 2) Proof of the production process; 3) Records of raw material purchases and sales (<em>e.g<\/em>., invoices, bills of lading); and 4) Any other documents necessary for the verification of the origin of the goods.&nbsp;<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Under the&nbsp;<em>2023 Notification<\/em>, once exporters had submitted all required documents, the DFT verifies the information against US or EU rules of origin. Upon confirming Thai origin, the DFT issues a verification statement through the&nbsp;<em>ROVERs PLUS<\/em>&nbsp;system, which exporters must present when applying for a Non-Preferential Certificate of Origin for the export of the \u2018<em>surveillance goods<\/em>\u2019 to the US or the EU. The list of \u2018<em>surveillance goods<\/em>\u2019 currently comprises 58 items and indicates their Harmonised System (hereinafter, HS) Codes subject to US or EU anti-dumping duties or tariffs.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">On 18 May 2026, the&nbsp;<em>2023 Notification<\/em>&nbsp;was repealed and replaced by two separate notifications, one specifically tailored to exports to the US and the other for exports to the EU, respectively. While the verification requirement, the procedure, and the list of \u2018<em>surveillance goods<\/em>\u2019 for the EU remain substantially unchanged, the&nbsp;<em>Notification&nbsp;<\/em>addressing exports to the US introduces two amendments. Firstly, it shortens the validity period of the verification results for US-bound exports from two years to one year, requiring exporters to regularly reassess and update their cost and production data to ensure that origin verifications continue to reflect their current manufacturing and sourcing conditions. Secondly, it expands the list of \u2018<em>surveillance goods<\/em>\u2019 foreseen for exports to the US from 49 product categories (covering 194 HS Codes) to 67 product categories (covering 294 HS Codes). Newly added products include cased pencils (9609.10), large residential washers (8450.11, 8450.20, 8450.90), and polyester textured yarn\/polyester staple fibre or fine denier polyester staple fibre (5402.33, 5402.52, 5503.20).&nbsp;<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><strong><em>Navigating anti-circumvention measures across ASEAN<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">ASEAN lacks a unified regional legal framework to address origin circumvention, relying instead on ASEAN Member States\u2019 national laws to trace product origin and to counter trade remedy evasion (see&nbsp;<em>Trade Perspectives<\/em>,&nbsp;<a href=\"https:\/\/www.fratinivergano.eu\/en\/trade-perspectives\/19-may-2025\/#origin\">Issue No. 10 of 19 May 2025<\/a>). Apart from Thailand, other ASEAN Member States have also strengthened their respective origin verification and certification regimes.&nbsp;<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">On 6 May 2025, in light of US concerns, Malaysia had&nbsp;<a href=\"https:\/\/www.miti.gov.my\/index.php\/pages\/view\/npco\">announced<\/a>&nbsp;that, with immediate effect, Non-Preferential Certificate of Origin for exports to the US would be issued exclusively by Malaysia\u2019s&nbsp;<em>Ministry of Investment, Trade and Industry<\/em>&nbsp;(MITI), at the request of the applicant. This replaced the previous system, under which such certificates were issued by business councils, chambers, or associations appointed by the Ministry.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">On 21 April 2025, Viet Nam\u2019s&nbsp;<em>Ministry of Industry and Trade<\/em>&nbsp;(MoIT) issued&nbsp;<a href=\"https:\/\/thuvienphapluat.vn\/van-ban\/Thuong-mai\/Decision-1103-QD-BCT-2025-revocation-of-authority-to-issue-certificate-of-origin-Norway-654237.aspx\"><em>Decision No. 103\/QD-BCT<\/em><\/a>, which revoked the authorisation granted to the Viet Nam&nbsp;<em>Chamber of Commerce and Industry<\/em>&nbsp;(VCCI) to issue certificates of origin and certificates of non-manipulation, transferring these responsibilities directly to the&nbsp;<em>Ministry of Industry and Trade<\/em>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The various measures introduced by Thailand, Malaysia, and Viet Nam, which centralise the issuance of Certificates of Origin under direct government oversight, represent a concrete response to heightened US scrutiny of origin fraud and transshipment practices. This regulatory shift is intended to reduce the risk of \u2018<em>origin washing<\/em>\u2019, enhance the credibility of origin certification systems, and mitigate the risk of further trade tensions with the US.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><strong><em>Implications for businesses&nbsp;<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Businesses exporting to the US should carefully review the newly updated list of designated \u2018<em>surveillance goods<\/em>\u2019 and the corresponding HS Codes set out in the&nbsp;<em>Notification<\/em>&nbsp;to ensure full compliance with the origin verification requirements. Where there is any uncertainty as to whether a product falls within the scope of the&nbsp;<em>Notification<\/em>, businesses should consider seeking legal advice to avoid instances of non-compliance. Failure to comply may result in the refusal to issue a Non-Preferential Certificate of Origin, and could expose exporters to increased scrutiny, enforcement actions, or penalties by the US authorities.&nbsp;<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">The compliance risks are likely to increase further, given the&nbsp;recent&nbsp;integration of real-time data sharing and joint factory audits between the DFT and Thai Customs. Any origin non-compliance can immediately block the issuance of Certificates of Origin and trigger severe legal penalties under the Thai&nbsp;<a href=\"https:\/\/www.customs.go.th\/data_files\/a48902e107a80bbbfc83d38742957569.pdf\"><em>Customs Act<\/em><\/a>. Moreover, according to the DFT, from early 2027, it plans to \u201c<em>deploy artificial intelligence (AI) to assist officials in detecting anomalies in origin certification applications, enhance data-sharing and connectivity among relevant government agencies, and strengthen post-verification audits of origin claims, among other measures<\/em>\u201d.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><strong><em>For any additional information or legal advice on this matter, please contact&nbsp;<\/em><\/strong><strong><em>Paolo R. Vergano<\/em><\/strong><strong><em><\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<h1 id=\"Indonesia\" class=\"wp-block-heading\">Indonesia updates its regulatory framework for food packaging: Advancing food safety and sustainability?<\/h1>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><strong><em>By&nbsp;<\/em><\/strong><strong><em>Joanna Christy,&nbsp;<\/em><\/strong><strong><em>Paolo R. Vergano, and Tobias Dolle<\/em><\/strong><strong><em><\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">On 30 June 2026,&nbsp;<a href=\"https:\/\/jdih.pom.go.id\/download\/rule\/1762\/11\/2026\/Peraturan%20Badan%20Pengawas%20Obat%20dan%20Makanan%20Nomor%2011%20Tahun%202026%20tentang%20Kemasan%20Pangan\"><em>Regulation No. 11 of 2026 on Food Packaging<\/em><\/a>, issued by Indonesia\u2019s&nbsp;<em>Food and Drug Authority<\/em>&nbsp;(<em>i.e.<\/em>,&nbsp;<em>Badan Pengawas Obat dan Makanan<\/em>, hereinafter, BPOM), entered into force. The Regulation repeals and replaces&nbsp;<a href=\"https:\/\/jdih.pom.go.id\/view\/slide\/842\/20\/2019\/07811dc6c422334ce36a09ff5cd6fe71\"><em>BPOM Regulation No. 20 of 2019 on Food Packaging<\/em><\/a>.&nbsp;<em>BPOM Regulation No. 11\/2026&nbsp;<\/em>was issued,&nbsp;<em>inter alia<\/em>, in response to the increasing adoption of reusable and recycled packaging.&nbsp;<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">This article provides an overview of&nbsp;<em>BPOM Regulation No. 11\/2026<\/em>, examines the new regulatory framework for reusable and recycled food packaging, and considers how these developments support Indonesia\u2019s broader sustainability and circular economy objectives.&nbsp;<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><strong><em>Indonesia\u2019s food packaging framework<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Previously,&nbsp;<em>BPOM Regulation 20\/2019&nbsp;<\/em>provided the regulatory framework for food packaging materials that come into direct or indirect contact with food. The Regulation addressed the safety of food packaging materials through requirements governing the substances that may be used in food packaging, the limits of substances that may migrate from packaging to food, and the testing methods used to assess compliance with those limits.&nbsp;<em>BPOM Regulation No. 11\/2026&nbsp;<\/em>repeals and replaces&nbsp;<em>BPOM Regulation 20\/2019<\/em>, but retains its core regulatory approach to food packaging safety and continues to apply to a broad range of food packaging materials, including plastics, rubber and elastomers, paper and paperboard, ceramics, glass, metals and metal alloys, and multilayer materials.&nbsp;<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><em>BPOM Regulation No. 11\/2026<\/em>&nbsp;retains the positive-list approach to food-contact substances, under which only substances expressly listed under the Regulation are authorised for use in food packaging. However,&nbsp;<em>BPOM Regulation No. 11\/2026<\/em>&nbsp;expands and updates the list of authorised substances, such as to include&nbsp;<em>Oleamide<\/em>&nbsp;and&nbsp;<em>Bisphenol S<\/em>.&nbsp;Annex III to&nbsp;<em>BPOM Regulation No. 11\/2026<\/em>&nbsp;lists the substances permitted for use in food packaging.&nbsp;<em>BPOM Regulation No. 11\/2026&nbsp;<\/em>expands the regulatory framework to introduce dedicated requirements for reusable and recycled food packaging.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><strong><em>Introducing dedicated provisions for reusable and recycled food packaging<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">A significant development under&nbsp;<em>BPOM Regulation No. 11\/2026<\/em>&nbsp;is the introduction of dedicated provisions for reusable and recycled food packaging. While&nbsp;<em>BPOM Regulation No. 20\/2019&nbsp;<\/em>recognised food packaging made from recycled materials, it did not establish any dedicated requirements.&nbsp;<em>BPOM Regulation No. 11\/2026&nbsp;<\/em>defines \u2018<em>reusable food packaging<\/em>\u2019 as \u201c<em>food packaging intended for repeated use<\/em>\u201d (<em>e.g.,&nbsp;<\/em>reusable plastic containers), while \u2018<em>recycled food packaging<\/em>\u2019 is defined as \u201c<em>packaging made from recycled materials that has undergone reprocessing<\/em>\u201d (<em>e.g.,&nbsp;<\/em>plastic packaging made from recycled plastic).&nbsp;<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Under&nbsp;<em>BPOM Regulation No. 11\/2026<\/em>, reusable and recycled food packaging must comply with the food safety requirements applicable to the relevant packaging material. However, the Regulation establishes additional testing requirements for reusable food packaging. In this context, Annex V to&nbsp;<em>BPOM Regulation No. 11\/2026<\/em>&nbsp;requires testing for: 1) Total migration, namely the overall amount of substances that may migrate from the packaging into food; and 2) Specific migration, namely the amount of a particular chemical substance from the packaging, such as&nbsp;<em>bisphenol A<\/em>&nbsp;that migrates into the packaged food, which must remain within the applicable migration limit.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">These tests must generally be conducted over three consecutive cycles using the same sample to assess whether migration levels remain within the prescribed limits during the packaging material\u2019s repeated use.&nbsp;The Annex further requires migration levels to remain stable or decrease over successive tests, demonstrating that the packaging material does not deteriorate in a manner that could compromise food safety.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><strong><em>Aligning Indonesia\u2019s food packaging framework with international developments<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Indonesia\u2019s regulatory framework currently only requires producers to reduce packaging waste, rather than mandating the use of recycled or reusable packaging materials.&nbsp;<em>Minister of Environment and Forestry Regulation No. P.75\/MENLHK\/SETJUN\/KUM.1\/10\/2019&nbsp;<\/em>regarding the&nbsp;<em>Roadmap for Waste Reduction by Producers<\/em>&nbsp;foresees,&nbsp;<em>inter alia,&nbsp;<\/em>that manufacturers, including food and beverage producers, should reduce their packaging waste by 30% by 2029 and to prohibit, from 1 January 2030, the use of plastic straws, single-use plastic bags, polystyrene, and plastic foam food containers.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Although recycled or reusable packaging can reduce waste and reliance on virgin materials, such as newly produced plastic resin, its wider adoption depends, in part, on ensuring that it remains safe for food contact. Therefore, by introducing dedicated food-safety provisions for reusable and recycled food packaging, including migration testing requirements for reusable plastic packaging under Annex V to&nbsp;<em>BPOM Regulation No. 11\/2026<\/em>, there is now&nbsp;greater regulatory certainty for businesses, which may support the wider adoption of&nbsp;sustainable packaging solutions.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">While Indonesia starts to address the food-safety aspects of reusable and recycled food packaging, other jurisdictions have already adopted more detailed frameworks.&nbsp;Notably, the EU has been at the forefront of regulating food-contact materials, including in the context of more sustainable approaches.&nbsp;<a href=\"https:\/\/eur-lex.europa.eu\/legal-content\/EN\/TXT\/?uri=CELEX%3A02022R1616-20251203\"><em>Commission Regulation (EU) 2022\/1616 of 15 September 2022 on recycled plastic materials and articles intended to come into contact with foods<\/em><\/a><em>&nbsp;<\/em>provides for a comprehensive regime governing recycled plastic materials intended to come into contact with food. In addition to requiring compliance with migration limits,&nbsp;<em>Regulation 2022\/1616<\/em>&nbsp;establishes detailed requirements governing,&nbsp;<em>inter alia,&nbsp;<\/em>recycling technologies, processes, quality assurance, traceability, and documentation to ensure that recycled plastics remain safe for food-contact applications.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">At the Southeast Asian regional level, the&nbsp;<a href=\"https:\/\/asean.org\/wp-content\/uploads\/ASEAN-General-Guideline-on-Food-Contact-Materials-Endorsed-26th-PFPWG.pdf\"><em>ASEAN General Guidelines on Food Contact Materials<\/em><\/a>&nbsp;recognise the growing use of recycled food-contact materials. While the Guidelines do not prescribe detailed technical requirements, they indicate that recycled materials should only be used where their safety has been demonstrated through the adoption of specific national measures governing key aspects, such as migration limits, authorised substances, and testing methods.&nbsp;<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><strong><em>Implications for businesses<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">Food packaging already placed on the market in Indonesia must comply with the requirements under&nbsp;<em>BPOM Regulation No. 11\/2026&nbsp;<\/em>within 12 months of its entry into force, namely<em>&nbsp;<\/em>by 30 June 2027. The introduction of&nbsp;<em>BPOM Regulation No. 11\/2026<\/em>&nbsp;is poised to have significant implications for manufacturers and importers of food packaging materials. Businesses will need to review their products and manufacturing processes to ensure compliance with the updated requirements governing food packaging materials and food-contact substances, including migration limits, authorised substances, and applicable safety assessment requirements.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">For businesses producing or supplying reusable or recycled food packaging,&nbsp;<em>BPOM Regulation No. 11\/2026&nbsp;<\/em>introduces additional compliance obligations. Reusable plastic food packaging is now subject to dedicated migration testing requirements under Annex V thereto. While these requirements may increase testing and compliance costs, they also provide greater regulatory certainty for businesses producing or using reusable and recycled packaging, as well as for consumers.<\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><strong><em>For any additional information or legal advice on this matter, please contact Paolo R. Vergano<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<h1 id=\"Legislation\" class=\"wp-block-heading\"><a><\/a><a><\/a>Recently adopted EU legislation<\/h1>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><strong>Trade Remedies<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li><a href=\"https:\/\/eur-lex.europa.eu\/legal-content\/EN\/TXT\/?uri=OJ%3AL_202601747&amp;qid=1784858159909\"><em>Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2026\/1747 of 23 July 2026 making imports of certain aliphatic-aromatic copolyesters originating in the People\u2019s Republic of China subject to registration<\/em><\/a><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li><a href=\"https:\/\/eur-lex.europa.eu\/legal-content\/EN\/TXT\/?uri=OJ%3AL_202601788&amp;qid=1784858159909\"><em>Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2026\/1788 of 23 July 2026 amending Implementing Regulation (EU) 2022\/191 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty on imports of certain iron or steel fasteners originating in the People\u2019s Republic of China<\/em><\/a><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li><a href=\"https:\/\/eur-lex.europa.eu\/legal-content\/EN\/TXT\/?uri=OJ%3AL_202601840&amp;qid=1784858159909\"><em>Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2026\/1840 of 23 July 2026 initiating an investigation concerning possible circumvention of the anti-dumping measures imposed by Implementing Regulation (EU) 2025\/2333 on imports of hardwood plywood originating in the People\u2019s Republic of China by imports of slightly modified hardwood plywood from the People\u2019s Republic of China and making such imports subject to registration<\/em><\/a><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li><a href=\"https:\/\/eur-lex.europa.eu\/legal-content\/EN\/TXT\/?uri=OJ%3AL_202601785&amp;qid=1784858159909\"><em>Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2026\/1785 of 23 July 2026 amending Implementing Regulation (EU) 2022\/191 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty on imports of certain iron or steel fasteners originating in the People\u2019s Republic of China following acceptance of a request for new exporting producer treatment<\/em><\/a><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><strong>Food Law<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li><a href=\"https:\/\/eur-lex.europa.eu\/legal-content\/AUTO\/?uri=OJ:L_202601820&amp;qid=1784604889929&amp;rid=3\"><em>Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2026\/1820 of 20 July 2026 amending Annexes V and XIV to Implementing Regulation (EU) 2021\/404 as regards the entries for the United States in the lists of third countries, territories, or zones thereof authorised for the entry into the Union of consignments of poultry and germinal products of poultry, and of fresh meat of poultry and game birds<\/em><\/a><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li><a href=\"https:\/\/eur-lex.europa.eu\/legal-content\/EN\/TXT\/?uri=OJ%3AL_202601789&amp;qid=1784858159909\"><em>Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2026\/1789 of 23 July 2026 amending Implementing Regulation (EU) 2021\/2325 as regards the recognition of certain third countries, competent authorities and control bodies for the purpose of importing organic products into the Union<\/em><\/a><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><strong>Other<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<ul class=\"wp-block-list\">\n<li><em><a href=\"https:\/\/eur-lex.europa.eu\/legal-content\/EN\/TXT\/?uri=OJ:L_202601778\">Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2026\/1778 of 16 July 2026 laying down the implementation arrangements for the digital product passport registry set up under Regulation (EU) 2024\/1781 of the European Parliament and of the Council\u00a0<\/a><\/em><\/li>\n<\/ul>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><em>Amanda Carlota, Alya Mahira, Florette Peter, Imelda Jo Anastasya, Joanna Christy, Paolo R. Vergano, Pattranit Chantaplaboon, Stella Nalwoga, and Tobias Dolle contributed to this issue.<\/em><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\"><em>Follow us on&nbsp;<\/em><em>Bluesky&nbsp;<\/em><a href=\"https:\/\/bsky.app\/profile\/fratinivergano.bsky.social\"><em>@fratinivergano.bsky.social<\/em><\/a><strong><em><\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n<p class=\"wp-block-paragraph\">To subscribe to&nbsp;<em>Trade Perspectives<\/em><sup>\u00a9<\/sup>, please click&nbsp;<a href=\"https:\/\/mailchi.mp\/fratinivergano.eu\/tradeperspectives_subscription\">here<\/a>. To unsubscribe, please click&nbsp;<a href=\"mailto:TradePerspectives@fratinivergano.eu?subject=Trade%20Perspectives%20Subscription\">here<\/a>.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":0,"template":"","meta":{"_acf_changed":false,"footnotes":""},"class_list":["post-1914","trade-perspectives","type-trade-perspectives","status-publish","hentry"],"acf":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.fratinivergano.eu\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/trade-perspectives\/1914","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.fratinivergano.eu\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/trade-perspectives"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.fratinivergano.eu\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/trade-perspectives"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.fratinivergano.eu\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"version-history":[{"count":1,"href":"https:\/\/www.fratinivergano.eu\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/trade-perspectives\/1914\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":1917,"href":"https:\/\/www.fratinivergano.eu\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/trade-perspectives\/1914\/revisions\/1917"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.fratinivergano.eu\/en\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1914"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}