How a Trump Administration Could Impact FDA and USDA: 'Expect Change'
Between Robert Kennedy Jr. being nominated to lead FDA’s parent agency and a proposed Dept. of Government Efficiency, the agencies that regulate the food & beverage industry should brace for seismic changes in 2025, according to a report from The Acheson Group (TAG).
Like maybe renewed calls for a single food agency?
Kennedy’s nomination – if approved by the Senate – is a bit of an enigma, contrasting his criticisms of suspect food ingredients, the presence of heavy metals in foods and “ultraprocessing” in general against Trump’s philosophies of less oversight of business.
“In a word, I would say to expect change,” said David Acheson, M.D., TAG’s founder and CEO, who was an associate commissioner for foods in the FDA. He says the changes “could create significant challenges and costs for food manufacturers, as they attempt to reformulate products for compliance.
“With the recent regulatory challenges shown by both USDA and FDA, which resulted in significant outbreaks, I would expect there to be a considerable focus on the restructuring of the agencies, with the potential for renewed discussion for a single agency,” he continued.
“This is particularly expected when considering the rhetoric of both Kennedy (stating that he sees entire departments, like FDA’s nutrition department that are not doing their job) and Trump who has said he would allow Kennedy to ‘go wild’ on health, food, and medicines.”
There almost certainly will be new leaders at FDA and USDA. But “If the position of Deputy Commissioner for Foods stays intact, it will be a key role, with food gaining a larger piece of the FDA pie than it has in the past.
“For USDA … I could see the focus on salmonella strategies decreasing or staying status quo as industry pushes back and the new administration lets it ride.”
If Kennedy does lead The Dept. of Health and Human Services, FDA's parent, “I would expect there to be a heavy focus on chemicals in foods, with a major review of all approved food additives, food colors, chemicals, etc., taking place,” Acheson continued. “While I don’t see the emphasis on heavy metals changing, other than an increase in the speed of the Closer to Zero initiative … I do see Generally Regarded as Safe (GRAS) as being incredibly vulnerable, due to its limited oversight and lack of transparency, which is becoming another buzzword of the new administration.
“With Kennedy’s stance on making America healthy, there’s no question that nutrition will be a driving factor for the food agencies and industry as a whole. It is an interesting counter to his stance on wanting to eliminate the entire nutrition department of FDA, as he has not defined quite how he would focus on nutrition without such a department. … One area the agency has been pushing is the Front of Package Labeling, and I would expect that to continue.
“Of greater challenge will be the new administration’s condemnation of ultraprocessed foods. At issue there is not only how to define ultraprocessed, but also how to maintain costs, shelf-life, etc., without some of the ‘ultraprocessing,’ for which the judgment is more about perception than about any actual negative health impacts.
“So, lots of change, and lots of wait-and-see.”
See the entire TAG article here.
