September 16, 2025
JECFA CBD 2025: Global Brands Still Face an Unresolved Gray Area
The 100th session of the Joint FAO/WHO Expert Committee on Food Additives (JECFA), convened in mid-2025, was widely anticipated by the international cannabis and food sectors. Stakeholders hoped JECFA might finally provide unified, science-based safety benchmarks for cannabidiol (CBD) in foods—a move that could catalyze product innovation, stabilize regulatory outlooks, and expand CBD’s global reach. However, the outcome was less definitive: JECFA’s recent proceedings did not establish clear, harmonized safety thresholds for CBD in food and supplements, leaving the patchwork of country-specific regulations intact for at least the foreseeable future.
Earlier communications from JECFA indicated optimism about developing a reference dose for non-intoxicating CBD in foodstuffs. Yet, the final reports from the 100th JECFA meeting confirmed what many compliance teams feared: ongoing data gaps—especially around chronic use, sensitive populations, and certain delivery forms—meant that the group could not complete a comprehensive safety evaluation for several use-cases. This means the international Codex Alimentarius Commission, which frequently uses JECFA’s scientific advisories to set standards for food safety worldwide, remains without a globally enforceable CBD guideline (FAO/WHO JECFA, 2025).
The lack of JECFA benchmarks has a direct impact on Codex member countries: rather than defaulting to a universal limit for CBD in food and beverages, each nation continues to manage CBD regulation based on their own risk assessments and evolving consumer protection stances. For multinational cannabis or food brands, this means that product formulations, dosage limits, and label claims must remain highly localized.
In the UK, the Food Standards Agency (FSA) continues its case-by-case approach to authorizing CBD products under the Novel Foods regime. Despite dozens of applications, as of Q3 2025, only a select few products have advanced beyond the validation phase, and final market authorizations are rare. The FSA maintains a dynamic public list of CBD products permitted for sale, and compliance teams must cross-reference this list against their inventory and distribution plans (FSA Novel Foods Status).
Across the European Union, the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) still has not issued a clear positive assessment for CBD novel food dossiers. In its 2024–25 updates, EFSA cited insufficient toxicological data and flagged uncertainties about long-term impacts on the liver and endocrine system. In practice, most EU countries either prohibit CBD in foods outright or allow it only under strict tolerance levels, often pending further advice (EFSA CBD Update).
While not a Codex member bound by international harmonization, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) still has not recognized CBD as Generally Recognized as Safe (GRAS) for use in foods or dietary supplements. State-level rules continue to evolve, with some jurisdictions permitting retail CBD edibles and others enforcing bans. Recent state actions, such as the tightening of intoxicating hemp derivative laws, further complicate matters for brands targeting multiple U.S. markets (FDA CBD Regulation).
Jurisdictions in Asia-Pacific, including Japan, Singapore, and China, maintain strict prohibitions on ingestible CBD. Latin American countries, once viewed as liberalizing, have recently issued warnings or recalls on cannabinoid-infused products that exceed local tolerances or lack novel food registrations. Compliance teams should continue to monitor these regulatory climates carefully.
In the absence of Codex or JECFA harmonization, brands must sustain parallel product lines tailored to the unique regulatory, dosage, and labeling requirements of each national market. It is critical to:
While JECFA’s scientific reviews are respected in international trade and at the World Trade Organization (WTO), its latest CBD advisories should be considered horizon-scanning tools rather than actionable standards—at least for the next year. Project and compliance planning should factor in the possibility of further scientific review or revised national stances.
With no single global rulebook, enforcement risks and market disruptions remain very real. Countries may issue recalls, restrict distribution, or challenge imports—even on products compliant with JECFA’s general scientific advice. This risk is especially pronounced for online sales and cross-border supply chains.
The ongoing debate around “intoxicating hemp derivatives” (e.g., delta-8-THC products) has prompted several countries to withdraw or tighten previously liberal CBD/hemp policies. Brands should track how these policy debates intersect with overall CBD tolerance schemes.
Direct communication with country regulators, legal advisors, and industry associations is more vital than ever. National interpretations often shift quickly, and proactive engagement increases the chance of early compliance alerts or input into developing guidance.
JECFA’s centennial meeting confirmed the scientific and regulatory complexity still surrounding CBD in foods and supplements:[
Consequently, businesses should not expect fast-tracked international standardization before further research—potentially years down the line. Instead, organizations should:
While Codex Alimentarius standards have resolved other food safety gaps in the past, the uniquely politicized and scientifically unsettled status of CBD means that a globally harmonized benchmark is unlikely until long-term safety data matures. For now, multinationals must accept fragmented markets and regulatory “gray areas” as the norm.
In summary: JECFA 100’s inability to deliver a global CBD food safety standard in 2025 means the landscape for JECFA CBD 2025 compliance is still fragmented and rapidly evolving. Businesses must lean into country-specific diligence, adaptable product strategies, and ongoing horizon-scanning to remain competitive and compliant.
For real-time analysis and compliance support across global cannabis/CBD regulations, consult CannabisRegulations.ai or connect with our regulatory experts.
