CODEX ALIMENTARIUS – FOOD ADDITIVES: Main Outcome of the 56th session of the Codex Alimentarius Committee on Food Additives (CCFA), CCFA56

The 56th session of the Codex Alimentarius Commit­tee on Food Additives (and on Flavorings, Enzymes, Yeasts, and Processing Aids) (i.e., CCFA56) suc­cessfully addressed all the topics on its agenda. Two historical features were achieved this year: (a) the finalization of a first-ever commodity stan­dard developed by CCFA on baker’s yeasts, and (b) a novel approach to ensure longer-term consis­tency between food additive provisions set in the GSFA (CXS 192) and those proposed for inclusion in commodity standards. CCFA56 also agreed to revive the discussion on ‘secondary food additives’, which had been put on a pause since 2015, for consider­ation at its next session. CCFA56 concluded on all its standing agenda items in adopting, amending, revok­ing, introducing, and discontinuing provisions, in or out of the GSFA. It also amended the international inventory for food additives, notably by allocating a number and the sweetener function to monkey fruit extract (with its Chinese synonym). CCFA56 also re­vised the list of priorities of JECFA reviews. CCFA56 decided to put on “pause” the process of alignment of food provisions set in commodity standards and those in the GSFA and instead perform a one-to-one feasibility comparison of correspondence in food categories set in the GSFA covering the relevant food standards. Finally, CCFA56 agreed to revisit at its next session the proposal for new work on a guide­line for the conduct of food safety assessment of cell culture media components used in the production of cell-based foods.¹

See more information available about CCFA work­ing documents quoted in this article,² as well as in the official report of the CCFA56 meeting.³

UPDATED FOOD ADDITIVE PROVISIONS IN TABLES 1, 2 AND 3 OF THE GSFA (CXS 192)

CCFA56 agreed to forward draft and proposed draft food additive provisions and revisions to adopted pro­visions to the upcoming session of the Codex Alimentarius Commission (CAC49) for final adoption⁴ as well as a couple of other food additive provisions already of the GSFA for revocation.⁵ Once approved by CAC49, they will all be published in the next version of the GSFA (CXS 192, 2026 version), expect­ed to be published during second semester of 2026. Consequentially, CCFA56 agreed to discontinue draft and proposed draft food additive provisions.⁶ Finally, CCFA56 agreed to include new or revised proposed draft provisions into the GSFA⁷ for consideration by the forthcoming electronic group (EWG) on the GSFA. In that regard, CCFA56 agreed that the PWG on the GSFA would no longer consider, under Agen­da Item 5b, any new proposals for inclusion in the GSFA submitted after the deadline specified in the Circular Letter requesting proposals for new and/or revised food additive provisions in the GSFA. CCFA56 also agreed to re-establish an EWG and a pre-session physical working group (PWG) on the GSFA with an extended mandate on the incorporation of provisions proposed for standardized products (i.e., those subject to “endorsement and incorporation into the GSFA” at a draft stage).⁸

ENDORSEMENT AND ALIGNMENT OF GSFA PROVISIONS WITH FOOD ADDITIVE PROVISIONS SET IN COMMODITY STANDARDS, AND REVERSELY

ENDORSEMENT

CCFA56 endorsed the food additives provisions for the following commodities covered by Codex stan­dard or draft standard and amended the Table 1, 2 or 3 accordingly: quick-frozen dumpling (regional, Asia); Maamoul (regional, Near East); Vanilla; Large cardamom; and, Coriander. CCFA56 kept on-hold the endorsement of the provisions for Doogh (regional, Near East), and send back those for sweet marjoram to CCSCH for further technological justifications.⁹

ALIGNMENT

Discussion paper to avoid further divergence between the GSFA, Commodity Standards and other related Codex texts: validation of the options presented in the working paper and of the engagement plan.

CCFA56 agreed to adopt new working practices for avoiding future divergence between food additive pro­visions in the GSFA, commodity standards, and other related Codex texts, and to make these new practices available on the Codex website as an information document.¹⁰ Consequently, CCFA56 agreed to withdraw the existing guidelines on avoiding future divergence of food additive provisions once the new working practices are implemented. CCFA56 also decided that a dedicated item on “Incorporation and Endorsement of Food Additive (and processing aid) provisions in Co­dex standards” will be added under the main agenda item covering the GSFA at each future CCFA meeting. CCFA56 encouraged all Codex members, observers, the Codex secretariat, and FAO and WHO to use the proposed communication and engagement plan included in the document to support both the initial implementation and the ongoing future application of the working practices. The Committee also agreed to review the operation and effectiveness of the adopted working practices after an appropriate period follow­ing its implementation by Commodity and Regional Coordinating Committees and by the CCFA.¹¹

Alignment – Main decisions

CCFA56 agreed to forward for final adoption by CAC49 (to be held this July) amendments to the food additive sections of following commodity standards: (a) three regional standards for Africa (i.e. fermented cooked Casava-based products; Fresh leaves of Gne-tum spp.; Dried Meat); two regional standards for North America and the South West Pacific (i.e., Kava products for use as a beverage when mixed with water; and, Fermented Noni Juice); the standard for cocoa butter, and revised provisions of the GSFA in relation to the alignment of these same three regional stan­dards for Africa and North America and the South West Pacific as well as for the provisions included in two regional standards for Latin America and the Caribbean (i.e. Culantro coyote; and, Lucuma); and for the General standard for fruit juices and nectars. CCFA56 also agreed with some revised provision for Steviol Glycosides uses in FC 08.2 by adding Notes XS96 and XS97 to exclude the standardized products covered by that food category.¹²

Alignment – EWG and PWG Mandates

CCFA56 further agreed to establish an EWG, under the leadership of Canada, supported by the United States of America and Japan, to (a) complete the align­ment of the Regional standard for mixed zaatar (Near East) (CXS 341R-2020); (b) develop recommendations on the migration of Table 3 additives—those related to commodity standards that have been previous­ly aligned and which are currently in Tables 1 and 2—into Table 3 and develop appropriate Notes and propose consequential amendments to the provisions in Tables 1 and 2 of the GSFA; and (c) verify the cor­respondence of the foods subsumed by the remaining commodity standards slated for alignment and the FCs of the GSFA, including those remaining standards for CCNFSDU (RUTF), CCCPL, CCFFV and CCPFV as set out in the information document Guidance to Commodity Committees on the Alignment of Food Additive Provisions; and (d) conduct an analysis on the provisions in the GSFA related to the CCFFP standards, to determine if any corrective actions are needed. CCFA56 agreed that a PWG could be held immediately prior to CCFA57 (half-day, preceding the session) under the leadership of Canada to consider and prepare recommendations for the CCFA57 plena­ry, based on the report of the EWG on Alignment.

NEW, REVISED, OR REVOKED SPECIFICATIONS FOR FOOD ADDITIVES AND FLAVOURINGS AND OUTCOME OF JECFA MEETINGS HELD SINCE CCFA55 MEETING

CCFA56 agreed to forward the full specifications for food additives and flavorings developed by JECFA100 and JECFA102 to CAC49 for final adoption and make all consequential amendments to the List of Codex Specifications for Food Additives (to be published in the 2026 edition of CXA 06).¹³

FINALIZATION OF THE CODEX STANDARD FOR BAKER’S YEAST

For the first time since the split from CCFAC in 2007 and the development of the Codex standard on food grade salt (CXS 150), CCFA56 finalized a commodity standard for baker’s yeast. The reference to colors that would involving terms like “milky” or “creamy” white, were changed to “characteristic colors”, based on an intervention of the International Dairy Federation (IDF). CCFA56 agreed to forward the draft standard for baker’s yeast to CAC49 for final adoption, noting that food additive provisions in the draft standard had been endorsed and aligned by CCFA56 during the session, and the provisions relating to food label­ling and methods of analysis and sampling would be endorsed by CCFL and CCMAS respectively. CCFA56 noted that this work represented the first commodity standard fully elaborated by CCFA in which the food additive provisions were developed, endorsed and aligned with the GSFA simultaneously, and expressed appreciation for the contributions of all Members and Observers to the advancement and finalization of that standard.¹⁴

PRIORITY LIST FOR JECFA SAFETY ASSESS­MENT OF FOOD ADDITIVES, FLAVOURINGS, AND PROCESSING AIDS (including ENZYMES)

CCFA56 considered the recommendations from an in-session physical working group (IWG) chaired by Kenya, as presented in CRD05, while the propos­als and other information received were collated in CRD33 Rev.1 to support the discussion during the IWG. CCFA56 agreed to forward the amended Priority List of Substances Proposed for Evaluation by JECFA for endorsement by CAC49 and to FAO and WHO (i.e., JECFA joint secretariats) for relevant follow-up. A new circular letter (CL) would be issued to request information and comments on additional inputs on the Priority List of substances proposed for evaluation by JECFA (deadline expected to be 15 January 2027).¹⁵ A concern regarding inconsistencies between the JECFA specification names and the name with the INS number set in CXG 36 was raised by the Codex Secretariat. JECFA secretariats reiterated their call for extra-budgetary fundings as to maintain JEC-FA support to CCFA, as nominal as possible. It was well noted that the next meeting of JECFA on food additives (June 2026) would be held in Nanjing, with the support of China.

PROPOSAL FOR ADDITIONS, DELETIONS OR OTHER CHANGES TO THE CLASS NAMES AND INTERNATIONAL NUMBERING SYSTEM FOR FOOD ADDITIVES

CCFA56 considered the recommendations from an IWG chaired by Belgium, building up on those of an intersessional EWG and comments received on that report to amend the Codex Guidelines on Class Names of Food Additives and the International Numbering System (CXG 36). Proposed changes, once adopted by CAC49, will be reflected in the 2026 version of the guidelines. CCFA56 also reestablished a new EWG on the INS, under the leadership of Belgium, to con­sider future replies to a circular letter (with deadline expected to be 15 September 2026) and proposed changes to CXG 36, as well re-open the discussion on the name for INS 165 (Gardenia blue / Gardenia (genipin) blue).¹⁶

CCFA56 discussed the proposal to assign the func­tional class “colour” to microcrystalline cellulose (cel­lulose gel) (INS 460(i)). The IWG Chair highlighted the need to first refer this matter to the GSFA EWG to assess its impact and any consequential amendments to the GSFA before the inclusion of the functional class colour in the INS. Such addition could result in unintended consequences, including the potential to mislead consumers and its possible inappropriateness in certain food categories. In this regard, GSFA EWG Chair noted that INS 460(i) is a Table 3 additive with an ADI “not specified”, and that the addition of the functional class “colour” could broaden its use across FCs, including non-standardized foods, and request­ed the views of JECFA on this matter. The JECFA Secretariat indicated that adding the functional class

“colour” would broaden the scope of use, but that in practice the use would likely remain limited to specific applications and, considering the nature of substance (cellulose), adding “colour” could be acceptable. CCFA56 agreed to refer the potential use of INS 460(i) as a colour to the GSFA EWG to assess its impact and analyze the need for possible consequential amend­ments to the GSFA, and to withhold its inclusion in CXG 36 pending the outcome of this assessment.

ISSUES OF FURTHER INTEREST

New work proposal on guidelines for food safety assessment of cell culture media components in cell-based food production

Given that the respective positions of the Codex mem­bers remain grossly the same as the ones expressed during CCFA55, CCFA56 agreed to establish an EWG under the leadership of Singapore with the support of China and the Republic of Korea, to (i) review the scope of the new work proposal for consideration by CCFA57; (ii) identify areas where joint FAO/WHO scientific advice would be required to support the work; and (iii) collate and review information on ex­isting regulatory approaches or approaches under de­velopment for safety assessment of cell culture media components amongst Codex Members. The topic was also subject to a side event insisting on the need for further dialogue amongst food safety regulators and food business operators, as well as more time to foster a further collective understanding, if not a common regulatory approach.

Future work of CCFA and prioritization mechanism: secondary food additives and food categorizations

CCFA56 concluded that there was a broad support for maintaining the GSFA as the core focus of the Com-mittee’s work, while recognizing the need to enhance its usability, including consideration of issues related to the food category system and the use of notes in GSFA. CCFA56 expressed support for the Option 3 in Recommendation 1, as the most feasible way forward for future GSFA work, i.e., to encourage Members and Observers to submit specific questions, comments, and examples of problematic food categories, as well as on issues relating to Notes, through a CL to be issued by the Codex Secretariat, for consideration by the GSFA EWG. It was further agreed that such CL would invite comments on potential amendments to the existing CL entitled “Request for proposals for new and/or revision of food additive provisions of the GSFA,” with a view to incorporating new areas requiring consideration by CCFA. A systematic and targeted ap­proach to the review of the GSFA Food Categorization system would include gathering of data and informa­tion as the initial step, with a view to understanding what are the problematic Food Categories. Based on the data and information collected through a CL, a working group(s) to address the identified problems would be established to undertake a comprehensive or targeted review of the GSFA problematic areas con­sidering the scope of the work of CCFA. The targeted review should be multi-year instead of a single review to consider the regular updating of the GSFA database as well as emerging requests to include new Food Categories. The FoodEx 2 – GSFA mapping table could be appropriate to clarify which FCs would apply in some cases.

There was also support expressed on further reflec­tions on secondary food additives and the offer of the European Union, with the support of Australia and New Zealand, to prepare a discussion paper about secondary additives and processing aids, including enzymes, for consideration at the next session was accepted. Future work would continue to be pursued within existing procedures and CCFA work priori­tization mechanisms. Ongoing challenges related to emerging food production systems might give also rise to new food-additive-related questions.

It was noted that much of the ongoing work about the GSFA online database and the future new Codex web-site would contribute to improving the GSFA accessi­bility, while maintaining its role as the only reference on food additives.

Mapping exercise of food categories set in the Codex GSFA with the EU FoodEx2 Database

Japan presented the results of the work on mapping food categories listed in FoodEx 2.0 used by EFSA, and the regulatory food categorization system used in the European Union with the food categories set in the GSFA. It was noted that initially a one-to-one conformity between FoodEx 2.0 and GSFA FCs was considered. However, some FoodEx 2.0 terms corresponded to multiple GSFA FCs and could not be narrowed down to a single term. In such cases, multiple GSFA FCs were linked to a single FoodEx 2.0 term. Four Appendices were developed to ensure a us­er-friendly format for analysis requirements. CCFA56 agreed to publish the GSFA FoodEx 2.0 mapping document as an information document with the cover page as presented in CRD32 (see Appendix XIII of REP26/FA).

The publication is posted in the April 2026 World Food Regulation Review. Find the full WFRR library here.

ENDNOTES