Freyr GRI

Agentic AI is moving beyond answering questions—it’s starting to take action.

For life sciences teams, this could transform how regulatory updates are monitored, assessed, and acted on.

But in a regulated industry, human judgment still matters. The key is knowing where AI can act independently and where people need to stay in control.

Vietnam's Food Safety Overhaul: What the Proposed Unified Regulatory System Means for Business

Vietnam is preparing for one of the biggest shake-ups to its food safety regulations in recent memory. The proposed changes could reshape how domestic and international companies handle compliance in one of Southeast Asia's fastest-growing food markets.

On May 15, 2026, Vietnam's Ministry of Health put forward a draft plan to overhaul the country's food safety oversight, moving away from a system split across multiple ministries toward a single, unified national structure.

If adopted, the plan would create one central food safety authority with responsibility spanning national, provincial, and commune-level oversight — a fundamental change in how food manufacturers, supplement companies, ingredient suppliers, and exporters engage with Vietnamese regulators.

For any business bringing food or health products into Vietnam, this is worth watching closely. It could reshape product registration, inspection procedures, and long-term market access planning.

How Food Safety Oversight Works in Vietnam Today

Currently, food safety regulation in Vietnam is split across three government ministries, each handling different product categories:

Ministry of Health (MOH) – processed foods, dietary supplements, and health-related products

Ministry of Agriculture and Environment – agricultural production, livestock, fisheries, and select food categories

Ministry of Industry and Trade – food distribution, trade practices, and certain packaged goods

This divided structure has worked for years, but it also creates friction for companies that operate across multiple product categories — think overlapping rules, inconsistent interpretation between agencies, and longer approval times.

The Proposed Fix: A Single National Food Safety Authority

The centerpiece of the reform is a new agency: the Vietnam Food Safety Administration (VFSA).

At the national level, the existing Food Safety Department (currently under the Ministry of Health) would be elevated and rebranded as the VFSA, absorbing staff and regulatory functions currently spread across other ministries.

A few areas would stay outside the new authority's scope, including:

Early-stage agricultural activity like cultivation and livestock management

Fisheries and slaughterhouse oversight

Anti-smuggling and trade fraud enforcement

Everything else related to food safety decision-making would essentially funnel through one national body.

At the provincial level, separate food safety units currently spread across different ministries would merge into a single Food Safety Department reporting directly to the Provincial People's Committee — cutting down on fragmented local oversight.

At the commune level, Vietnam plans to stand up new Food Safety Teams as dedicated public service units. These teams would be responsible for inspections, compliance monitoring, violation reporting, and general enforcement support — a notable expansion of regulatory reach down to the local level.

Why Vietnam Is Making This Change

The restructuring ties into a broader government push to modernize how public administration works, guided in part by Directive No. 17-CT/TW. The core objectives are fairly straightforward:

Remove duplicated regulatory responsibilities

Make enforcement more consistent

Sharpen accountability

Cut down on administrative delays

Improve coordination between national and local regulators

Strengthen consumer protection across the food supply chain

With food imports and domestic production both growing quickly, Vietnamese regulators are clearly looking for a more efficient way to keep up.

Who Should Be Paying Attention

Any company manufacturing or exporting into Vietnam should be tracking this closely — particularly those in:

Dietary supplements

Functional foods

Nutraceuticals

Packaged foods

Food ingredients and additives

Beverages

Health and wellness products

Imported consumer food goods

The end goal is a simpler system, but getting there will likely mean some short-term turbulence.

What the Transition Might Look Like

The draft outlines a phased rollout:

Phase 1 (July–December 2026): Legal groundwork, internal restructuring, government approvals

Phase 2 (January–July 2027): Coordinating operations and transferring regulatory authority between agencies

Phase 3 (2027–2030): Ongoing evaluation, policy adjustments, and long-term review

During this window, businesses could run into things like: updated registration procedures, shifting lines of regulatory authority, new documentation requirements, revised inspection processes, temporary approval slowdowns as agencies reorganize, and general uncertainty while the dust settles. Anyone planning a product launch in Vietnam should keep a close eye on how this unfolds.

The Bigger Picture for Global Manufacturers

Vietnam has become one of Asia's most attractive markets for food, supplements, and wellness products. As demand keeps climbing, regulatory clarity matters more than ever for companies trying to plan ahead.

Done well, a centralized authority could mean faster approvals, more consistent decisions, clearer compliance procedures, and better-aligned enforcement overall. Companies that aren't tracking the transition, though, risk getting caught off guard by delays or compliance gaps.

How Freyr Can Help

Regulatory overhauls like this one create real uncertainty for companies operating across borders. Staying ahead of it requires proactive intelligence — understanding how shifting requirements will actually affect approvals, obligations, and market entry timelines.

Freyr works with food manufacturers, supplement companies, nutraceutical brands, ingredient suppliers, and exporters to navigate exactly this kind of regulatory change, offering:

Global food regulatory intelligence monitoring

Product registration strategy

Ingredient compliance assessments

Labeling and claims review

Regulatory gap analysis

Import compliance documentation review

Country-specific regulatory pathway assessment

Market entry strategy

End-to-end regulatory support for food and supplement products

Catching regulatory risk early gives businesses room to make informed decisions and protect their market position long-term.

Bottom Line

Vietnam's push toward a unified food safety system, anchored by the new Vietnam Food Safety Administration (VFSA), is one of the most significant regulatory shifts the country has seen in years. For companies in food, supplements, nutraceuticals, and health products, it promises real efficiency gains down the road — paired with some compliance headaches along the way.

How many regulatory platforms does one organization really need?

As portfolios grow, managing regulations across products and markets becomes more complex.

freya unifies regulatory intelligence across life sciences and consumer industries—giving your team one trusted platform for faster, informed decisions.

One platform. Smarter regulatory decisions.

Pressure reveals every weakness in a process.

When regulatory information is fragmented, decisions slow down.

freya delivers the right regulatory context and intelligence in one place—helping teams act faster, reduce uncertainty, and make confident decisions under pressure.

Stay decision-ready with freya.

Why Cosmetic Compliance Can't Be an Afterthought in the E-Commerce Era

The rise of online shopping has transformed the beauty industry, putting cosmetics within a click's reach for consumers everywhere. But this convenience comes with a hidden cost: as brands sell across borders, keeping up with different countries' safety rules gets harder, and the risk of unsafe products slipping through the cracks grows. Businesses that fall short on compliance don't just risk fines — they risk product recalls and lasting damage to their reputation.

A Troubling Question

Countries around the world have safety rules in place for cosmetics. So why do products with dangerous ingredients keep showing up on store shelves and shopping carts?

Much of the answer comes down to weak spots in how compliance gets enforced — especially online, where it's much harder to verify a product before it reaches a buyer.

Skin-lightening creams offer a sobering case study. In India, several of these products were tied to serious health problems, including kidney damage, after testing turned up mercury and lead at levels far beyond what's legally allowed. The Philippines has seen similar problems, with regulators and consumer groups flagging cosmetics containing banned substances that were still being sold despite existing restrictions. Cases like these make clear why stronger oversight, better market monitoring, and thorough pre-market checks matter so much.

Counterfeits Are Multiplying Online

E-commerce hasn't just made real products easier to buy — it's also made fakes easier to sell. Counterfeit cosmetics copy the look of trusted brands but skip the manufacturing standards and safety checks that legitimate products go through.

Testing on counterfeit products has turned up heavy metals, bacterial contamination, cancer-causing chemicals, and ingredients that were never approved for use — sometimes in formulas that barely resemble the real thing. Without solid safety and ingredient compliance in place, these knockoffs slide easily into online marketplaces, putting both consumers and legitimate brands at risk. As more shopping moves online, tightening up compliance has never mattered more.

What's Really at Stake

Long-term exposure to mercury and lead in cosmetics can lead to kidney damage, neurological problems, skin conditions, and other lasting health effects.

The damage isn't only physical. Each incident chips away at consumer trust and serves as a reminder that cosmetic safety can't be treated as an afterthought. It's a case for taking regulatory compliance seriously and monitoring products continuously, not just at launch.

The takeaway is simple: cosmetic safety isn't just a quality metric. It's a matter of public health.

The Case for Registration and Notification

One of the strongest tools regulators have is requiring Cosmetic Registration or Cosmetic Notification before a product ever reaches the market.

These processes give regulators a chance to catch unsafe or non-compliant products early. Manufacturers and importers are typically asked to submit formula details, heavy metal testing data, labeling, manufacturer information, and safety documentation for review. Skip this step, and hazardous products can slip through — often only getting caught after someone's already been hurt.

Everyone Has a Role to Play

Keeping cosmetics safe in an online marketplace isn't just the regulator's job. Marketplaces, importers, distributors, retailers, and brand owners all share responsibility. Before a product gets listed, imported, or distributed, stakeholders should confirm:

Ingredient compliance

Labeling accuracy

Manufacturer information

Product authenticity

Safety documentation

Registration or notification status

These checks are what stand between consumers and unsafe or counterfeit products — and they're what keep regulatory compliance meaningful rather than just procedural.

Looking ahead, compliance will depend on:

Stronger market surveillance

Greater accountability from e-commerce platforms

Better tools for spotting counterfeits

Companies that treat compliance and safety as priorities — not boxes to check — will be the ones best positioned to protect consumers and stay competitive across markets.

The Bottom Line

Cosmetic compliance isn't paperwork for paperwork's sake. It's a core consumer protection mechanism that ensures products are safe before they ever reach a shelf or a shopping cart. As the industry keeps moving online, stronger compliance, more marketplace accountability, and rigorous pre-market checks will only become more essential.

Every Regulatory Question Deserves a Smarter Answer

"Quick question" just got quicker with Ask freya. 😅

Get trusted regulatory answers, relevant follow-up insights, conversation memory, and source-backed references—all in one place.

Explore, verify, and make informed decisions without starting over.

Ask smarter with freya.

"Quick question…" famous last words. 😅

One regulatory question can trigger endless forwards, delays, and missed deadlines.

freya gives your team instant access to trusted global regulatory intelligence—so you can get answers faster, reduce bottlenecks, and keep projects moving.

Don't wait for the right inbox. Ask freya.

Professional maze navigator wasn't in the job description.

Regulatory teams shouldn't waste time searching through scattered information.

freya brings the right regulatory context together, helping you move from question to decision—faster and with confidence.

Find the faster path with freya.

Choose your next move wisely♟️

When critical information is spread across emails, spreadsheets, and manual trackers, every decision takes longer than it should.

freya brings together the signals that matter, adds the right regulatory context, and helps teams move from information to action with confidence.

So you get clearer priorities and a workflow built to keep pace with regulatory change.

The EU's Packaging and Packaging Waste Regulation (PPWR): What Businesses Need to Know

The Packaging and Packaging Waste Regulation (PPWR) is one of the most far-reaching sustainability laws to come out of the European Union in recent years. It sets out to change how packaging is designed, produced, used, and disposed of across every stage of its life. Formally known as Regulation (EU) 2025/40, PPWR replaces the older Packaging and Packaging Waste Directive that had governed the sector since 1994, and it puts a single, harmonized framework in place across all EU member states.

The shift from a directive to a regulation matters more than it might seem. Under the old directive, each member state had room to interpret and apply the rules in its own way, leading to a patchwork of national requirements. PPWR closes that gap: because it is directly applicable law, any business selling into or exporting to the EU now faces the same packaging rules no matter which member state it operates in.

For sectors that depend heavily on packaging — food and dietary supplements chief among them — this is a substantial shift. Companies will need to reconsider packaging design, material choices, labeling practices, and their broader sustainability roadmaps.

Why the EU Created PPWR

Packaging waste has been growing faster than almost any other waste stream in Europe, straining waste management systems and driving continued reliance on virgin materials. The previous regulatory patchwork also left recycling rates inconsistent and did little to curb the environmental toll of single-use packaging.

PPWR is the EU's answer: a push toward a circular economy in which packaging materials stay in circulation longer through reuse, recycling, and better recovery systems.

Specifically, the regulation is meant to tackle:

Rapidly growing packaging waste volumes

Continued dependence on virgin and non-renewable raw materials

Weak reuse and recycling performance

Environmental pollution linked to single-use packaging

Europe's broader climate and sustainability commitments

By tightening packaging standards, the EU is betting it can cut environmental impact while pushing industries toward more sustainable innovation.

What PPWR Is Trying to Achieve

The regulation lays out several long-term goals that will reshape packaging practices across Europe:

Recyclable-by-design packaging by 2030. All packaging entering the EU market must be designed to be recyclable and to work within existing recycling infrastructure.

Higher recycled content requirements. Plastic packaging producers will need to meet minimum recycled-content thresholds, which vary by packaging type, cutting demand for virgin plastic.

Less packaging overall. Companies must strip out unnecessary layers, cut down on wasted space, and streamline designs so less material is used in the first place.

More reuse and refill options. The regulation pushes reusable packaging and refill systems into more product categories to reduce single-use reliance.

Tighter limits on hazardous substances. Chemicals like PFAS (per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances), often found in food-contact packaging, will be restricted once they cross certain thresholds.

A genuinely circular system. The end goal is a packaging economy where materials are recovered and reused continuously rather than thrown away after one use.

How PPWR Will Roll Out

The EU has mapped out a phased timeline for compliance:

Date

Milestone

January 2025

PPWR formally adopted and published

February 2025

Regulation enters into force across the EU

August 2026

Most operational compliance obligations begin applying

2030 and beyond

Core targets — recyclability, recycled content — become fully enforceable

Some obligations won't kick in until as late as 2040, but given the scale of change involved, businesses are being encouraged to start planning now rather than waiting for deadlines to approach.

What Companies Will Need to Do

Any business placing packaging on the EU market will need to address several requirements:

Design for recyclability. Packaging has to be built so it can be efficiently collected, sorted, and recycled within current waste systems.

Meet recycled-content thresholds. Rather than a simple recyclable/non-recyclable label, PPWR introduces graded recyclability classes starting in 2030, with tougher rules following in 2038.

Cut down on excess packaging. This applies especially to e-commerce and consumer goods, where oversized packaging and wasted space are common.

Introduce reuse or refill systems in certain product categories.

Standardize labeling so material composition, recyclability, and disposal instructions are clear to consumers.

Take on extended producer responsibility (EPR), meaning manufacturers become accountable for the full lifecycle of their packaging, including collection and recycling costs.

Complete conformity assessments and issue an EU Declaration of Conformity. Importers, meanwhile, must confirm these steps have been completed and keep records for the required retention period.

What This Means for Food and Dietary Supplement Companies

Few sectors will feel PPWR's impact as strongly as food and supplements, given how much these industries rely on specialized packaging to protect product safety, stability, and shelf life.

Packaging materials will need to change. Formats that fall short of the new recyclability standards may need to be redesigned — a particular concern for multilayer materials. That could affect bottles, containers, sachets, pouches, blister packs, flexible packaging, and even transport and secondary packaging.

Food-contact compliance gets stricter. New restrictions on substances like PFAS may force companies to reformulate packaging materials and run additional safety testing, all while still meeting food safety rules.

Redesign becomes unavoidable. Manufacturers will likely need to cut material use, boost recyclability, update labeling, and align with the new sustainability expectations — or risk losing market access for non-compliant packaging.

Costs will rise, at least initially. Expect higher spending on packaging redesign, testing and certification, supply chain adjustments, sustainability reporting, and regulatory documentation. Companies that invest early, though, may come out ahead in the long run.

Compliance becomes a market-access issue. Meeting PPWR's requirements won't just be a box to check — it will determine whether a company can keep selling into the EU at all. Early movers stand to gain a real edge in brand reputation and competitiveness.

Where Packaging Is Headed

PPWR isn't just another environmental rule — it marks a broader shift in how packaging will be approached globally. For food and supplement companies, that likely means:

Sustainable packaging becoming the industry norm rather than the exception

More transparency around what packaging is made of and how to dispose of it

Heavier investment in recyclable and reusable materials

Stronger accountability across supply chains

Rising consumer expectations for environmentally responsible products

Businesses that get ahead of these shifts now will be in a much stronger position as the regulatory landscape continues to evolve.

The Bottom Line

The Packaging and Packaging Waste Regulation (PPWR) is one of the EU's most consequential sustainability regulations to date, resetting expectations for how packaging is designed, produced, recycled, and reused. Its impact will be felt most by industries — like food and dietary supplements — that depend heavily on packaging for product protection and shelf life.

The PPWR Declaration of Conformity: Why the Document Is Only Half the Story

As the EU Packaging and Packaging Waste Regulation (PPWR) draws closer to full implementation, packaging manufacturers, importers, and brand owners are going to run into one term constantly: the Declaration of Conformity (DoC). Getting a real handle on this document is essential to navigating the wider set of EU packaging rules now reshaping the industry.

On the surface, a DoC looks straightforward — a handful of compliance statements, a signature, a date. But treating it as a routine formality is exactly what puts companies at risk. A signed statement with nothing behind it isn't compliance; it's a liability waiting to be discovered.

The real value of a Declaration of Conformity isn't the paperwork itself — it's the body of evidence that stands behind it.

What Exactly Is a Declaration of Conformity?

A DoC is the formal document in which an economic operator states that a packaging product meets the applicable requirements of the PPWR. Think of it as the final checkpoint before a product goes to market — the point at which someone is formally vouching that the packaging has already been evaluated and satisfies the relevant obligations.

It gives regulators, customers, and supply chain partners an official assurance that the assessment work has happened. What it is not is a stand-in for that work. A DoC declares that compliance has been demonstrated — it doesn't create the compliance itself.

Why It Matters More Than It Looks

Under the PPWR, market surveillance authorities can ask a company to justify why its packaging was declared compliant in the first place. When that request comes in, a signed DoC on its own usually won't satisfy them. Companies need to produce the underlying documentation, on a set timeline, and walk through exactly how conformity was established.

This is precisely where a lot of organizations run into trouble — because a Declaration of Conformity is only as credible as the technical file backing it up.

What Should Sit Behind the Declaration

A well-supported DoC rests on a technical file that typically includes:

Clear identification of the packaging and its intended use

Details of packaging components and materials

Supplier declarations and related documentation

Food contact compliance information, where relevant

Data on PFAS and other regulated substances

Recyclability assessments

Packaging minimization evaluations

Applicable standards, specifications, and test reports

Version control and document management records

Documented conformity assessment procedures

Taken together, this is the evidence that turns a Declaration of Conformity from a signature into an actual, defensible claim of EU packaging compliance.

The Three Pillars of PPWR Compliance

It helps to think of PPWR compliance as resting on three legs:

1. The Declaration of Conformity — the formal statement that compliance has been achieved.

2. Technical Documentation — the evidence trail showing how that compliance was actually reached.

3. The Evidence Register — the traceable record of assessments, supplier data, and compliance activity underpinning it all.

Strip out the second and third pillars, and the first one is just a piece of paper.

The Misconception Companies Keep Making

Most organizations put their energy into producing the Declaration of Conformity itself — which, frankly, is the easy part. The harder and more valuable work is building the compliance infrastructure underneath it: packaging data management, supplier evidence collection, technical assessments, and a documented decision-making trail.

The Bottom Line

There's nothing inherently wrong with a one-page Declaration of Conformity. A one-page DoC with no supporting evidence behind it, on the other hand, is a real compliance exposure.

Genuine packaging compliance starts well before a DoC ever gets signed. It begins with mapping your packaging portfolio, understanding your regulatory obligations, collecting supplier information, and maintaining a solid technical dossier.

Do that groundwork first, and a Declaration of Conformity becomes what it's supposed to be: credible proof that your packaging actually meets PPWR requirements — not just a signature on paper.