Commission Delivers Report on Implementing EU Rules Against Unfair Trading Practices in the Food Supply Chain

Adopt provisional, risk-based monitoring for cross-border edible-goods transactions to curb retaliation and protect smaller suppliers.

Examining adopted measures, authorities must harmonize with European legislative targets. These steps specify concrete remedies for late payments, price squeezes, and non-monetary pressure, with focus on verification and enforcement mechanics that countries will implement in 2025 and beyond. union priorities guide this work.

Specific risk indicators highlight where pressure arises: late transfers, withheld information, and unfavorable contract terms. When indicators flash, protective measures kick in and authorities transferred responsibility to cross-border teams for prompt intervention; later results feed into a continental confirmation process for ongoing improvement.

Data from national dashboards shows later-stage checks cover millions of transactions, with roughly 1.3 million deals examined and 300 thousand flagged for further review, creating improvement paths across related sectors.

Union-wide adoption remains ongoing; still late entry by some member states creates risk for cross-border protection, but confirmation of progress in several jurisdictions is expected soon, with related guidance adopted later to ensure consistent rollout and enhanced safeguards.

European authorities must ensure participatory oversight, with part of resources allocated to these interfaces to reduce fear among smaller traders and prevent retaliation; this approach aligns with improvement objectives and sets a concrete path into upcoming legislative cycles.

EU Regulation on Unfair Trading Practices in the Food Supply Chain: Summary and Practical Guidance

Recommendation: Build a specific, well documented framework to manage supplier dealing across agricultural producers and larger enterprises, anchored in a confirmation process that logs price, quantity, and payment timetable for each supplier relationship. Use promotion of transparent terms to reduce imbalances and strengthen position within networks.

In European practice, authorities could require agreements to include short-notice adjustments, non-discrimination in charging, and a clear order of priority when conflicts arise, including charging below market norms. The approach relies on a central authority, with investigations and on-site assessments, to reveal patterns of dominance and power by larger buyers over producers; outside players should be subject to same standards, ensuring fair dealing across all countries.

Operational steps: Build a unified data feed to display key indicators within a single system. Important metrics include payment timeliness, order clarity, relationship duration, and charging if fees occur beyond agreed terms. Use public-facing promotion to show progress and encourage best practices among enterprises, especially smaller producers and suppliers in different countries.

Only compliant suppliers gain access to advanced payment terms and preferential placement in orders.

Historical pilots have been conducted and evaluated across multiple markets, showing improved handling of imbalances and increased faith in process integrity. By transferred risk from vulnerable parties to robust governance, relationships were strengthened, and trust grew among producers and suppliers alike.

Later phases will extend coverage to additional countries, reinforcing protection for agricultural enterprises and improving overall market balance. Within each arrangement, ensure a clear order of operations, a transparent display of terms, and a mechanism to resolve disputes at short-notice, preserving working relationships in online and offline networks.

Scope and Affected Parties in Practice

Immediate step: enforce targeted regulation and agreed measures to curb charging abuses while enabling fair dealing with customers.

Scope covers micro firms, rural producers, and mid-range companies operating across borders, with clear objectives to address imbalances and reduce grey areas in dealing.

Examining interactions across markets, minute details matter; a charging framework should specify price bands and advertising standards to prevent misleading promotions and ensure transparency.

Being practical, this stance relies on data sharing and timely request for information to support regulation across borders.

Main Prohibited Practices and Examples for Retailers and Suppliers

Begin with a written compliance framework staff can apply across every transaction with farmer partners and retailers, establishing provisional terms that enhance protection for farmers and customers within union borders.

Most common banned conduct includes late payments, unilateral term shifts, hidden charges, and off-contract deals outside official channels; in rural procurement, retailers must avoid region-based price discrimination, which threatens farmer stability and customer trust. Example: a retailer delays payment by 30 days after delivery; farmer bears cash-flow pressure in rural environments.

Measures to address these risks include clear, written terms, defined payment windows (14–30 days), and explicit disclosure of any rebates; avoid outside incentives tied to shelf space; all actions documented in a single file to support accountability and protection within borders.

To strengthen position of farmers, propose a safe approach focusing on transparent price signals, timely settlements, and written records; general objectives center on agriculture viability, rural development, and customer trust; implementation across rural and urban environments benefits more than december milestones alone.

источник: union data shows that most measures contribute to protection for smallholders, with staff awareness improving, and customer fear of hidden terms reduced; if early engagement occurs, transaction flow grows, and borders stay protected, while retailers gain stability, profit, and trust, reaching a million in annual turnover.

Transparency, Documentation, and Information Exchange Requirements

Adopt a centralized, machine-readable ledger and standardized templates for transaction records shared by producers, wholesalers, distributors, and retailers. This reduces issues of missing data and helps staff verify order histories before pricing decisions are made.

Establish clear objectives for data sharing that cover price formation, order size, payment terms, delivery windows, and marketing claims related to products. These requirements should apply across agri-food networks, with a focus on transparency for customer-facing communications and thinking about scope.

Documentation should cover contracts, payment schedules, risk allocations, related relationships, and records of advertising claims. A grey area remains around micro-seller interactions; clear signs help defend against imbalances that disadvantage producers and other actors.

Information exchange must be secure, with defined access levels, data minimization, and audit trails before any transaction data is shared externally. European alignment ensures cross-border information flows stay compliant with agri-food ecosystem needs.

Implementation milestones should be practical, not theoretical: digitize a million records this year, escalate to full implementation across all actors within two years. This approach helps staff read trends, identify issues early, and align thinking with customer needs and marketing strategies below thresholds. These metrics guide budget and training decisions.

Governance rests on a simple, general framework: assign responsibilities to producers, cooperatives, and larger enterprises; set regular data submission cycles; require documentation that clarifies order terms and transaction timing.

Misconduct prevention relies on clear advertising and pricing signals aligned with customer interests; monitor imbalances and address them before they escalate.

Before onboarding, stakeholders identified issues, agreed on a common approach, and set a performance baseline. european guidance complements efforts across agri-food networks, enabling a larger, coherent framework. They should be supported by staff training programs to build capability for ongoing data maintenance and quick responses to detected gaps.

Enforcement, Sanctions, and Access to Redress

Recommendation: Establish a tiered enforcement framework with immediate remedial orders and proportionate penalties, backed by transparent public disclosure and accessible redress channels.

Authorities should exercise their power to conduct short-notice inspections, require documents, and verify claims at affected parties’ premises, while respecting data protection and limiting disruption to operations. Progress and outcomes must be displayed in a public register to build faith among buyers and other market participants.

Penalties should be proportionate to gravity, with automatic remedial actions completed within 30 days and monetary sanctions tied to turnover; examples include up to 2 million for minor breaches or up to 2% of yearly turnover for persistent harm, capped by ceilings for larger operators.

Access to redress should be straightforward: a dedicated online channel for lodging complaints and requesting damages, responses within 60–90 days, and a binding mechanism for remedial actions and payment of sums owed. An independent review panel can handle appeals, providing alternative paths for claimants in different circumstances.

To improve transparency and learning, maintain a public dashboard listing types of breaches, measures taken, and aggregated penalties tied to turnover, with anonymized case summaries and metrics below headline. Public display of results fosters trust and supports establishing continuous improvement.

Implementation should proceed in three stages over twelve to twenty-four months: harmonize national rules, build capacity within authorities, and upgrade information systems to support data collection, tracking, and display of outcomes. A budget in the millions is appropriate to fund training, case handling, and development of payment-disbursement processes.

Special attention should be given to buyer side: ensure access to remedies for those who have suffered direct disadvantages, and provide guidance on how to exercise rights. When position is used to extract payments or impose improper demands, authorities must act to rectify, transferred liability where justified, and mandate measures to prevent recurrence. Beyond authority, mechanisms should ensure accountability and independent oversight.

Step-by-Step Compliance Plan for Businesses and Auditors

Begin with a concrete recommendation: perform a risk-based mapping of all commercial interactions within agri-food networks, focusing on unilateral terms, order flows, and payment terms that affect turnover and cash cycles; align with legislative expectations and customer protections.

1. Asset mapping and stakeholder list: Identify producers, farmers, and customers, plus intermediaries in agri-food ecosystems. Capture relationships, contract templates, and order patterns; map value flow, including price signals and charging elements; document where terms appear unilateral or ambiguous.

2. Objectives and governance: Define general objectives for compliance, assign clear ownership across procurement, sales, legal, and finance units. Establish a monitoring approach that states what success looks like and how improvement will be measured.

3. Risk assessment and data gathering: Conduct a risk review focusing on payments timing, unilateral changes to terms, and non-transparent price formation. Build a data set from master agreements, invoices, and case records; identify high-risk cases and potential impact on farmer and producer margins.

4. Policy design and controls: Develop standardized provisions to reduce unjust interactions, specify standard order flows, and require explicit justification for any deviation. Create a list of minimum terms that protect farmers, agri-food suppliers, and customers; include a clause for prompt payment and dispute resolution.

5. Specific proposal for improvement: Draft a targeted amendment package addressing issues such as late payments, unilateral price adjustments, and undisclosed charges. Ensure terms are transparent and aligned with legislative guidelines; propose a phased rollout to minimize disruption to producers and partners.

6. Implementation plan: Roll out revised templates, train relevant staff, and update supplier agreements. Enforce new processes for notification of changes, share of information, and audit readiness; set milestones linked to turnover and customer satisfaction metrics.

7. Monitoring and verification: Establish ongoing oversight using defined metrics (e.g., compliance rate, number of clarified cases, time to resolve disputes). Track effectiveness of controls in protecting smallholders and improving general welfare in agriculture and agri-food ecosystems.

Documentation and communication: Maintain clear documentation of decisions, changes, and outcomes. Produce summaries for internal audit and external oversight that illustrate how thinking and practice have evolved toward greater transparency and equity.

9. Continuous improvement and iteration: Review performance quarterly, incorporate feedback from farmer and customer groups, and revise terms where improvements are needed. Use findings to refine network relationships and reduce risk exposure across all actors.