Regulations Amending the Health of Animals Regulations and the Safe Food for Canadians Regulations (Reducing Red Tape and Supporting Resilience — Import Reference Document, Hatcheries and Fresh Fruits and Vegetables): SOR/2025-192

Canada Gazette, Part II, Volume 159, Number 21

Registration
SOR/2025-192 September 19, 2025

HEALTH OF ANIMALS ACT
SAFE FOOD FOR CANADIANS ACT

P.C. 2025-666 September 18, 2025

Her Excellency the Governor General in Council, on the recommendation of the Minister of Agriculture and Agri-Food and the Minister of Health, makes the annexed Regulations Amending the Health of Animals Regulations and the Safe Food for Canadians Regulations (Reducing Red Tape and Supporting Resilience — Import Reference Document, Hatcheries and Fresh Fruits and Vegetables) under

Regulations Amending the Health of Animals Regulations and the Safe Food for Canadians Regulations (Reducing Red Tape and Supporting Resilience — Import Reference Document, Hatcheries and Fresh Fruits and Vegetables)

Health of Animals Act

Health of Animals Regulations

1 Section 2 of the Health of Animals Regulations footnote 1 is amended by adding the following in alphabetical order:

import reference document
means the document entitled Import Reference Document, prepared by the Agency and published on its website, as amended from time to time; (document de référence)

2 The definition import reference document in section 10 of the Regulations is repealed.

3 Paragraph 72.8(1)(b) of the Regulations is replaced by the following:

Safe Food for Canadians Act

Safe Food for Canadians Regulations

4 Section 1 of the Safe Food for Canadians Regulations footnote 2 is amended by adding the following in alphabetical order:

Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Grades Document
means the document entitled Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Grade Requirements, prepared by the Fruit and Vegetable Dispute Resolution Corporation and published on its website, as amended from time to time. (document sur le classement des fruits et légumes frais)

5 The Regulations are amended by adding the following after section 4:

Compendium prevails

4.1 The requirements set out in the Compendium prevail over those set out in the Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Grades Document to the extent of any inconsistency or conflict between them.

6 Sections 113 to 115 of the Regulations are replaced by the following:

Imported potatoes

113 (1) Potatoes that are imported must meet the requirements for the grade Canada No. 1 that are set out in the Compendium or the Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Grades Document.

Presumption — potatoes from United States

(2) Potatoes that are imported from the United States are considered to meet the requirements for the grade Canada No. 1 that are set out in the Compendium or the Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Grades Document if the potatoes have been graded in the United States and meet the applicable requirements that are set out in the document entitled Grade Standard Requirements for Fresh Fruits or Vegetables Imported from the United States, prepared by the Agency and published on its website, as amended from time to time.

Apples from foreign state other than United States

114 (1) Apples that are imported from a foreign state other than the United States must meet the requirements for the grade Canada Extra Fancy, Canada Fancy or Canada Commercial that are set out in the Compendium or the Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Grades Document.

Apples from United States

(2) Apples that are imported from the United States must meet the requirements for the grade Canada Extra Fancy or Canada Fancy that are set out in the Compendium or the Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Grades Document.

Presumption — apples from United States

(3) Apples that are imported from the United States are considered to meet the requirements for the grade Canada Extra Fancy or Canada Fancy that are set out in the Compendium or the Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Grades Document if the apples have been graded in the United States and meet the applicable requirements that are set out in the document entitled Grade Standard Requirements for Fresh Fruits or Vegetables Imported from the United States, prepared by the Agency and published on its website, as amended from time to time.

Presumption — general

115 Fresh fruits or vegetables, other than potatoes or apples, that are imported from the United States are considered to meet the applicable requirements that are set out in the Compendium or the Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Grades Document if the fruits or vegetables have been graded in the United States and meet the applicable requirements that are set out in the document entitled Grade Standard Requirements for Fresh Fruits or Vegetables Imported from the United States, prepared by the Agency and published on its website, as amended from time to time.

7 Paragraphs 116(b) to (d) of the Regulations are replaced by the following:

8 (1) Subparagraphs 117(1)(a)(ii) to (iv) of the Regulations are replaced by the following:

(2) Paragraph 117(1)(b) of the Regulations is replaced by the following:

9 Subparagraph 118(1)(a)(ii) of the Regulations is replaced by the following:

10 Paragraph 213(c) of the Regulations is replaced by the following:

11 Section 229 of the Regulations is amended by adding the following after subsection (3):

Consumer prepackaged fresh fruits or vegetables — specific case

(4) Despite paragraph (1)(a), in the case of consumer prepackaged fresh fruits or vegetables, the numerical quantity in the declaration of net quantity must be shown in characters that are at least 1.6 mm in height.

12 Section 241.2 of the Regulations is amended by striking out “and” at the end of paragraph (c), by adding “and” at the end of paragraph (d) and by adding the following after paragraph (d):

13 Subsection 270(1) of the Regulations is replaced by the following:

Type size

270 (1) The information that is required by section 269 must be shown in boldface type in characters that are at least 1.6 mm in height.

14 Section 271 of the Regulations is repealed.

15 Section 305 of the Regulations is replaced by the following:

Definition of grade name in Act

305 For the purposes of the definition grade name in section 2 of the Act, the grade names that are set out in the Compendium, the Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Grades Document and the Grades Document are prescribed in respect of foods.

16 (1) Paragraphs 306(1)(b) and (c) of the Regulations are replaced by the following:

(2) Subsection 306(2) of the Regulations is amended by adding the following after paragraph (b):

(3) Paragraph 306(4)(a) of the Regulations is replaced by the following:

(4) Paragraph 306(4)(c) of the Regulations is replaced by the following:

17 The portion of section 307 of the Regulations before paragraph (a) is replaced by the following:

Optional grading

307 The following foods for which grades are prescribed by these Regulations, if they are graded and sent or conveyed from one province to another, or imported or exported, must meet the requirements that are set out in the Compendium, the Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Grades Document or the Grades Document in respect of the applicable grade of that food and must be labelled, in accordance with the Compendium, the Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Grades Document or the Grades Document, with the applicable grade name that is set out in the Compendium, the Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Grades Document or the Grades Document:

18 Paragraph 308(1)(b) of the Regulations is replaced by the following:

19 (1) Paragraph 312(a) of the Regulations is replaced by the following:

(2) Section 312 of Regulations is renumbered as subsection 312(1) and is amended by adding the following:

Fresh fruits or vegetables

(2) Despite paragraph (1)(b), in the case of consumer prepackaged fresh fruits or vegetables, the grade name must be shown in characters that are at least 1.6 mm in height.

20 (1) Paragraph 320(1)(b) of the Regulations is replaced by the following:

(2) Subsection 320(2) of the Regulations is repealed.

21 Section 321 of the Regulations is replaced by the following:

Size designation

321 Fresh fruits or vegetables that are sent or conveyed from one province to another or imported may be labelled with the applicable size designation, if any, that is set out in the Compendium or the Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Grades Document. Any size designation on the label must be shown in close proximity to the grade name and in characters that are at least 1.6 mm in height.

22 Schedule 6 to the Regulations is amended by replacing the reference after the heading “SCHEDULE 6” with the following:

(Section 229, paragraphs 312(1)(b) and 324(a) and section 325)

Coming into Force

23 These Regulations come into force on the day on which they are registered.

REGULATORY IMPACT ANALYSIS STATEMENT

(This statement is not part of the Regulations.)

Executive summary

Issues: The Government of Canada has committed to reduce red tape by eliminating outdated or unnecessary rules and to streamline the administration of regulatory requirements. In support of this commitment, the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) is advancing targeted regulatory amendments through an omnibus package aimed at reducing red tape and supporting economic competitiveness and resiliency of the agricultural sector. These changes are designed to remove prescriptive requirements, provide increased flexibility, support innovation, level the playing field for Canadian producers, and ensure that regulations continue to support the prosperity of Canadian agricultural producers, agri-food businesses, and communities.

Description: The amendments focus on two key regulations — the Health of Animals Regulations (HAR) and the Safe Food for Canadians Regulations (SFCR). In total, six categories of amendments are being introduced; four target the HAR (three involve the Import Reference Document [IRD], which is incorporated by reference [IBR] into the HAR) and two target the SFCR.

The suite of HAR amendments includes the following: first, the IRD will become ambulatory, which creates a more responsive import framework, enabling quicker alignment with international standards and scientific developments. Complementary updates to the IRD will respond to stakeholder requests by streamlining import conditions and aligning them with domestic requirements. This includes updating import conditions for feeder calves, benefiting veal calf importers to obtain maximum value for their animals and aligning testing requirements for eggs sourced from the United States with domestic standards, enhancing the competitiveness of Canadian licensed hatcheries. Additionally, amendments to the HAR will provide licensed hatcheries with greater flexibility in meeting traceability requirements.

The SFCR amendments will remove overly prescriptive labelling requirements for fresh fruits and vegetables (FFV) and address key stakeholder concerns. Amendments to transfer responsibility for maintaining certain FFV grade standards to the Fruit and Vegetable Dispute Resolution Corporation (DRC) will allow FFV grades to be more responsive to industry needs, innovations, and market competitiveness. In addition, amendments to remove mandatory grading requirements for FFV that will be manufactured, processed or preserved will reduce regulatory burden for the industry and provide increased flexibility.

Rationale: In line with the Government of Canada’s red tape reduction commitment, the primary rationale for the amendments is to reduce red tape to support the competitiveness and resiliency of the agricultural sector. Supported by stakeholders, the changes will address long-standing irritants, do not impose new costs and remove regulatory burden. The amendments will also offer greater flexibility, support innovation, and create a more level playing field for Canadian businesses.

Issues

The Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) has identified various regulatory requirements that add unnecessary red tape, or which can be updated to better support competitiveness in the agricultural sector without compromising the CFIA’s mandate to ensure food safety and animal and plant health.

The CFIA is addressing these through the Regulations Amending the Health of Animals Regulations and the Safe Food for Canadians Regulations (Reducing Red Tape and Supporting Resilience — Import Reference Document, Hatcheries, and Fresh Fruit and Vegetables).

Objective

The objective of these amendments is to remove overly prescriptive or outdated requirements, provide increased flexibility, support innovation, and level the playing field for Canadian businesses. This will be accomplished through amendments under the HAR and the SFCR, which collectively will reduce red tape, support economic competitiveness and support innovation to ensure the competitiveness and resiliency of Canada’s agricultural sector.

Health of Animals Regulations

Safe Food for Canadians Regulations

Amendments under the Health of Animals Regulations

Amendment 1: Incorporate the Import Reference Document into the HAR on an ambulatory basis

Issues

The Import Reference Document is a document incorporated by reference (IBR) under the Health of Animals Regulations. The IRD sets out conditions for importing animals into Canada to mitigate any potential risks. However, the IRD is incorporated by reference in the HAR on a static basis. This means a regulatory amendment is required to update or make changes to the import conditions in the document. The CFIA lacks the agility to make changes quickly to the IRD to respond to new and emerging risks, to address requirements of trading partners or to support the industry.

Background

The IRD was incorporated by reference into the HAR on a static basis in January 2007. The HAR sets out that all regulated animals and germplasm (as defined within the HAR), from any country, can only be imported into Canada in accordance with either a permit issued by the Minister (referred to as an import permit) or if they are compliant with the requirements set out in the IRD.

The HAR set out the specific import requirements for certain regulated animals and germplasm entering Canada. Some examples of commodities that have import requirements set out in the IRD include Canadian animals returning to Canada from the United States (such as bovines, caprines and ovines), animals imported for immediate slaughter (such as bovines, equines and poultry), various animals imported from the United States for purposes other than immediate slaughter (such as ferrets, equines, poultry, pigeons, ostriches, hatching eggs, pet birds, etc.) and for certain companion animal species (such as domestic cats and most domestic dogs).

Legislative and regulatory authorities

The Health of Animals Act (HAA) establishes a legislative framework to prevent the introduction or spread of diseases within Canada that affect animals or may be transmitted by animals to people. Subsection 64.1(1) of the HAA provides the CFIA authority to incorporate by reference documents on an ambulatory basis (i.e. a regulatory amendment is not required to modify the document) or on a static basis (i.e. a regulatory amendment is required to modify the document). IBR documents have the same force as the regulation into which it is incorporated.

Under the authority of the HAA, the IRD is incorporated by reference on a static basis in section 10 of the HAR.

Federal and provincial/territorial context

Import conditions for animals are strictly a federal government’s responsibility.

International context

This amendment to make the IRD ambulatory is purely administrative and does not impact other countries or international trade. However, if the CFIA is proposing any changes to the import conditions set out in the IRD, it would consult with international partners as part of its regular process.

Objective

The objective is to increase the agility to update import conditions in the IRD. In turn, this will

Description

The amendment will move the definition of the IRD from section 10 to section 2 of the HAR and enable the IRD to be amended by the CFIA from time to time. This change will convert the current static IRD to an ambulatory document, allowing the CFIA to make updates to it without seeking regulatory amendments.

Any updates to the IRD would follow the CFIA Incorporation by Reference Policy, as well as the Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat’s Guide to Incorporation by Reference in Federal Regulations. This will ensure that any updates to the IRD are made in a transparent manner. For example, the process to update or add import conditions in the IRD will include

Regulatory development

Consultation

Given that this amendment is administrative in nature, stakeholders were not consulted. However, any updates to the IRD would follow the CFIA’s process described above.

Regulatory analysis

Stakeholders

The following stakeholders are expected to be impacted by the amendment:

Benefits and costs
Baseline scenario

Under the baseline scenario, the IRD would continue to be incorporated by reference into the HAR on a static basis. Any update to the IRD would require a regulatory amendment. This process would continue to impede the CFIA’s ability to make timely, science-based updates to address emerging risks and diseases.

Regulatory scenario

With the amendment, the incorporation by reference of the IRD in the HAR will be made ambulatory. This will allow changes to the IRD without a regulatory amendment. Rather, amendments would follow CFIA’s Incorporation by Reference Policy, as well as the Treasury Board Secretariat’s Guide to Incorporation by Reference in Federal Regulations, which includes appropriate consultations and analysis. This will provide the agility needed to make timely, science-based updates to address emerging risks and diseases.

Stakeholder benefits

Stakeholders will benefit from a regulatory framework that keeps pace with evolving industry needs and priorities. The added agility will strengthen Canada’s global competitiveness by enabling quicker alignment with international standards and emerging science, helping Canadian importers and producers remain competitive in global markets.

Stakeholder costs

There are no costs to stakeholders, as this amendment does not add or change import conditions. However, the CFIA will continue to assess potential impacts on businesses when proposing future changes to import conditions in the IRD.

Government of Canada benefits

The amendments will give the CFIA increased agility to update import conditions, allowing better responsiveness to evolving industry needs and to prevent and respond to foreign animal disease risks.

Government of Canada costs

There are no costs to the CFIA to change the IRD to an ambulatory IBR document.

Small business lens

Small businesses will benefit from a regulatory framework that keeps pace with evolving industry needs and priorities. However, the small business lens does not apply, as the amendment does not change existing regulatory requirements, it simply provides authority to make the IRD ambulatory. In the event that a change is made to the import conditions in the IRD in the future, the CFIA will engage stakeholders as appropriate, as per its IBR policy, and assess the potential impacts to stakeholders, including small businesses.

One-for-one rule

The one-for-one rule does not apply, as making the IRD ambulatory does not change any existing regulatory requirements and, therefore, has no impact on administrative burden on businesses. However, in the event that a change is made to the import conditions in the IRD in the future, the CFIA will engage with stakeholders as appropriate and assess the potential impacts. There is also no repeal or addition of regulations.

Amendment 2: Update import conditions for veal in the IRD to increase flexibility for veal producers

Issues

A “feeder calf” is a male calf that is imported into Canada for the purpose of feeding and subsequent slaughter as veal. Section 17 of the IRD sets out the import conditions for feeder calves imported into Canada from the United States. Specifically, section 17 states that feeder calves must be slaughtered, or exported back to the United States, no later than 36 weeks after importation. This time limit may not allow Canadian veal producers to achieve optimal market value for their veal carcasses. As such, the industry has requested that the time limit be increased from 36 to 40 weeks.

Additionally, section 17 of the IRD restricts the importation of feeder calves to a 6-day window. Feeder calves may only be imported if they are at least 8 days of age, and a maximum of 14 days of age at the time of import from the United States. Industry has indicated that allowing calves to be imported after 14 days of age will provide veal producers with the additional flexibility necessary to ensure the continued stability of veal production in Canada.

Firstly, the eight-day minimum age does not align with domestic transport of animal requirements under the HAR (Part XII — Transport of Animals). While the HAR does allow the transportation of calves eight days old or less, it can only be done under specific conditions necessary to protect these younger vulnerable animals. General livestock transportation requirements in the HAR, which align with typical commercial transportation used for the import of feeder calves, apply to animals nine days of age or older. Harmonizing the IRD with the HAR by increasing the minimum age from eight days to nine days for feeder calves will ensure regulatory consistency and address a long-standing industry request for clarity.

Secondly, the 14-day maximum age is restrictive, does not align with industry needs, is not harmonized with the United States and restricts importers from easily sourcing veal from the United States, which may lead to supply chain disruptions.

Background

Importing veal feeder calves from the United States into Canada is important, as it allows Canadian veal farmers to manage seasonal fluctuations in supply. This supports year-round production and ensures processors and retailers have a consistent supply of veal to meet consumer demand.

Section 17 of the IRD sets import and post-import conditions for veal cattle sourced from the United States. This includes the condition for veal feeder calves to remain in quarantine until they are slaughtered or returned to the United States. Other IRD conditions establish minimum and maximum ages at the time of import. However, as noted above, the ages are prescriptive and don’t respond to current industry practices.

Veal is defined by carcass weight and maturity characteristics, such as bone colour, as described in the Beef, Bison and Veal Carcass Grade Requirements (PDF) [the Carcass Grade Requirements], a document that is incorporated by reference into the Safe Food for Canadians Regulations and maintained by the Canadian Beef Grading Agency. Much of the value from veal comes from its weight. In January 2020, the veal carcass weight limit was raised from 180 kg to 190 kg in the Carcass Grade Requirements. This change provides producers additional flexibility to meet the grade requirement, but has also resulted in needing more time to raise their calves in order to optimize carcass value.

Legislative and regulatory authorities

The Health of Animals Act establishes a legislative framework to prevent the introduction or spread of diseases within Canada that affect animals or may be transmitted by animals to peoples. It includes the authority to incorporate by reference documents into the HAR. Under this authority, the IRD is incorporated by reference into the HAR and section 17 sets out the import conditions for feeder calves.

Federal and provincial/territorial context

Import and export conditions for animals are a federal government’s responsibility. The CFIA is responsible for the importation and inspection of veal calves. The Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA) is not involved, including port of entry (POE) inspections.

International context

Given the need for geographic proximity to import animals within a short time window, the United States is Canada’s sole source for feeder calve imports. Changes to the import conditions outlined in the IRD will need to be reflected in corresponding U.S. documentation, such as export certificates. The CFIA is working with the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) through established processes to coordinate these updates. However, the changes do not impact international trade with other countries, nor do they affect the export of veal products to other countries.

Objective

The objective of the amendments is to remove outdated requirements that will provide producers with flexibility to optimize the value of their veal carcasses and to improve regulatory clarity. The changes strengthen the resilience and competitiveness of Canada’s agricultural sector by extending the import window for producers to source veal from the United States and to enable producers to obtain higher values for their veal.

Description

Post-import slaughter timeframe

Amendments to the IRD will increase the time that a feeder calf must be slaughtered or exported to the United States from 36 weeks to 40 weeks.

Increasing maximum import age

Amendments to the IRD will increase the maximum allowable age of animals at the time of import from 14 days to 21 days.

Aligning minimum import age

Amendments to the IRD will update the minimum import age condition in the IRD from 8 days to 9 days to better align with the HAR.

Regulatory development

Consultation

The Canadian Veal Association (CVA) first raised concerns regarding three IRD import conditions for feeder calves in June 2021. It requested an extended timeframe to raise veal cattle up to 40 weeks before slaughter, alignment of the minimum import age with the Health of Animals Regulations transportation requirements at 9 days of age, and the removal of the maximum import age restriction. Following a review, the CFIA determined that the first two changes posed no concerns for animal health, welfare or trade. However, the CFIA concluded that maintaining an upper age limit is necessary to avoid overlap with the restricted feeder cattle import stream. As a compromise, and to improve flexibility for producers sourcing veal cattle from the United States, the upper age limit will be increased to 21 days.

More recently, in spring 2025, the CVA expressed support for the CFIA’s effort to change the import conditions for feeder calves in the IRD, including increasing the maximum import age restriction from 14 to 21 days of age, as opposed to removing the import condition.

The CFIA has also engaged the USDA, who is aware of the proposed changes and has not expressed any concerns.

Regulatory analysis

Economic context

Veal is a product of both the dairy and beef sectors. In 2024, there were 106 490 grain-fed veal slaughtered in Canada, which at $9.47/kg and an average weight of 164 kg represents approximately $141 million in estimated value. In 2024, the number of imported calves for veal represented 18% of Canada’s grain-fed veal. These amendments may allow producers the opportunity to bring their imported calves up from the average carcass weight of 164 kg to the target of 180 kg, increasing their mass by 16 kg and, at $9.47/kg, earning an estimated $152 more per carcass, minus the expense of keeping the calf for a longer period.

Stakeholders

The following stakeholders are expected to be impacted by the amendments:

Benefits and costs
Stakeholder benefits

These amendments directly respond to stakeholder concerns about needing additional time to optimize their veal carcasses. They benefit stakeholders by providing more flexibility around slaughter dates. The additional time to increase the carcass weight also presents an opportunity to optimize the carcass value.

Canadian veal producers will also benefit from the extended import time window, as it will increase the supply of feeder calves and enhance the sector’s competitiveness in both domestic and international markets. In addition, the amendment to increase the minimum age at the time of import to nine days to align with the HAR transport regulations will provide greater clarity for stakeholders.

Stakeholder costs

These regulatory amendments will not result in additional costs to the industry, as they do not introduce new requirements. Increasing the minimum import age for calves from eight to nine days aligns with current business practices, and extending the time to slaughter after import provides producers with more flexibility to increase carcass yield.

Government of Canada benefits

These amendments do not result in any incremental benefits to the CFIA.

Government of Canada costs

No additional costs will be incurred by the Government of Canada. Imported veal calves will continue to be inspected by CFIA at the point of entry, including the verification of a valid U.S. export certificate, and there will be no changes to CFIA’s food inspection oversight.

Small business lens

Analysis under the small business lens concluded that the regulations will not result in an incremental increase in administrative or compliance costs on Canadian small businesses. The majority of veal producers meet the definition of “small business” in the Policy on Limiting Regulatory Burden on Business, and the changes will benefit these producers by providing them increased flexibility.

One-for-one rule

The one-for-one rule will not apply, as there is no incremental change in administrative burden on businesses. There is also no repeal or addition of regulations.

Amendment 3: Update import conditions in the IRD to require Salmonella Enteritidis testing for hatching eggs imported from the United States to align with domestic requirements

Issues

In November 2022, the CFIA updated the hatchery requirements in the HAR to require licensed Canadian hatcheries to source eggs from supply flocks that test for various types of Salmonella, including Salmonella Enteritidis (SE), a significant source of foodborne illness in humans. However, the corresponding import conditions for hatching eggs from the United States set out in the IRD were not updated and do not currently require SE testing.

This misalignment results in an unlevel playing field between Canadian supply flocks, who must test for SE to supply Canadian licensed hatcheries, and U.S. supply flocks who are not required to do so. It also creates a disadvantage for Canadian hatcheries, as hatcheries who source only domestically are required to obtain eggs from SE-tested flocks.

The CFIA acknowledged the discrepancy between the HAR and IRD in 2022 when the HAR was amended and indicated that the IRD would be updated through a separate regulatory process.

Background

A hatchery is a place where hatching eggs are incubated, and birds are hatched for an intended purpose (e.g. further breeding or to produce table eggs or meat) by a processor at another location. Hatching eggs are fertilized poultry eggs that come from breeder birds (also known as supply flocks) for incubation and hatching. Hatcheries source their hatching eggs from supply flock operators.

Given its place between supply flock operators and processors, the hatchery is a critical point of potential dissemination of diseases that are a risk to human health and animal health. Therefore, ensuring the proper testing of diseases for hatching eggs sourced from supply flock operators is essential.

There are 82 hatcheries currently licensed under the HAR for different purposes (e.g. research, breeding stock, commercial production) and for various species (e.g. broiler chicken, egg type, turkey, waterfowl and game birds).

Legislative and regulatory authorities

The Health of Animals Act establishes a legislative framework to prevent the introduction or spread of diseases within Canada that affect animals or may be transmitted by animals to people​. It includes the authority to incorporate by reference documents into the HAR. Under this authority, the IRD is incorporated by reference into the HAR and section 12 of the IRD sets out the import conditions for hatching eggs imported from the United States.

Modernized regulations for hatcheries (Part VIII.1 of the HAR — Hatcheries and Supply Flocks) were published on November 9, 2022, and came into force on November 9, 2023. This included a requirement for licensed hatcheries to source hatching eggs from supply flocks tested for various types of Salmonella, including SE (section 72.7 of the HAR).

Provincial and territorial context

Import requirements for animals are strictly a federal government’s responsibility.

However, there is an overlap between the hatchery requirements of the HAR and provincial requirements, as some provinces have their own hatchery regulations. In 2023, the federal hatchery regulations (Part VIII.1 of the HAR) were updated to ensure a consistent standard across Canada and better alignment with some provincial and territorial requirements and those of major international trading partners. This supports domestic trade and market access for Canadian poultry products.

International context

Canada is a member of the World Organisation for Animal Health (WOAH), which sets standards for animal disease prevention and control to facilitate trade. Of particular importance for hatcheries is the WOAH Terrestrial Animal Health Code, which contains recommendations for the prevention of dissemination of infectious agents and advocates for a written biosecurity plan (e.g. prevention and control plan, or PCP), cleaning and disinfection, and surveillance to detect infectious agents, such as SE. The amendments align with these international standards.

Objective

The objective of the amendments is to level the playing field for Canadian supply flocks and hatcheries by requiring imported hatching eggs from the United States destined to licensed hatcheries to be tested for SE and align with the domestic testing standards.

Description

Section 12 of the IRD (Hatching Eggs) will be updated to specify that imported hatching eggs destined for Canadian licensed hatcheries must have been sourced from a flock that tested for SE and are negative. This requirement will continue to be verified through export certificate reviews as part of routine inspections at licensed hatcheries.

The amendments only apply to hatching eggs. Revisions to the IRD for chicks will be addressed at a later date alongside other necessary updates to poultry conditions in the IRD.

Regulatory development

Consultation

Canadian stakeholders were consulted on the amendments to the HAR to require hatcheries to source eggs from supply flock operators that test for various types of Salmonella, including SE. This consultation took place after the prepublication of the amendments in the Canada Gazette, Part I, from March 2020 to September 2020. During the consultation, stakeholders raised questions regarding how Canadian hatcheries and supply flock operators would ensure the health status of hatching eggs and day-old chicks imported from the United States and noted the need to update the IRD.

In February 2025, some stakeholders reiterated the need to ensure parity between Canadian and U.S. supply flocks by harmonizing SE testing requirements. In spring 2025, stakeholders confirmed their general support for the amendments and indicated that all surveyed licensed hatcheries who import hatching eggs from the United States already meet the new testing requirement through the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) National Poultry Improvement Plan (NPIP).

The CFIA has also engaged the USDA, who is aware of the proposed changes and has not expressed any concerns. The USDA will update corresponding U.S. documentation, such as export certificates, to reflect the changes to the import conditions in the IRD.

Regulatory analysis

Economic context

In 2023, Canadian hatchery imports were $116.4 million. Between 2019 and 2023, there was 17% growth in exports and 48% growth in imports. Canada remains heavily dependent on the United States for its parent hatching egg supply, with nearly 100% of all imports coming from U.S. sources.

Stakeholders

The following stakeholders are expected to be impacted by the amendments:

Benefits and costs
Stakeholder benefits

While current information indicates that imported hatching eggs are already meeting SE testing requirements by licensed Canadian hatcheries, the regulations will provide greater assurance that this practice will continue and provide a means for appropriate compliance and enforcement measures. In this way, the amendment will ensure that hatching eggs imported from the United States by licensed Canadian hatcheries will be subject to the same testing requirements as those applied to domestic supply flocks. This will ensure parity between Canadian and U.S. supply flocks serving the Canadian market and licensed Canadian hatcheries. In addition, Canadian hatcheries will continue to benefit from the assurance that the hatching eggs they import are free from SE. This helps to reinforce Canada’s reputation for high animal health and food safety, supporting continued and expanded access to international markets for Canadian poultry products.

Consumers will also benefit from a continued safe poultry supply chain, as these measures help mitigate the risk of SE, an important source of foodborne illness in Canada.

Stakeholder costs

Through stakeholder engagement, namely the Canadian Hatchery Federation, it was determined that licensed Canadian hatcheries importing hatching eggs are already sourcing them from SE-tested U.S. supply flocks.

As a result, licensed Canadian hatcheries importing hatching eggs are already in compliance with the proposed requirement, and the amendment is not expected to introduce any new compliance costs for them. Potential compliance costs could be incurred if licensed hatcheries were sourcing hatching eggs from sources not tested for SE.

Government of Canada benefits

By aligning the SE import conditions in the IRD with testing requirements for domestic supply flocks under the HAR, it will enable more consistent compliance and enforcement of hatchery standards. Further, it supports CFIA’s mandate to safeguard animal health and food safety, helping to mitigate the risk of foodborne illness associated with poultry.

Government of Canada costs

Minor costs will be incurred by the CFIA to update operational guidance for CFIA and CBSA inspectors and the Automated Import Reference System (AIRS) to ensure the revised import conditions are clear to stakeholders. No other costs will be incurred by the CBSA. Imported hatching eggs will continue to be inspected by CBSA at the point of entry, including the verification of a valid U.S. export certificate.

There will be no changes to CFIA’s food inspection oversight, and no additional inspection costs are anticipated. CFIA inspectors will continue to verify that valid U.S. export certificates are maintained on file at licensed hatcheries and that these certificates confirm all required conditions, including the new requirement that imported hatching eggs from the United States are tested for SE.

Small business lens

The small business lens applies, as Statistics Canada indicates that 99.2% of businesses in the poultry and egg production industry are small businesses.footnote 3 Licensed hatcheries already import SE-tested hatching eggs from the United States under the current certification process and will not incur new costs.

One-for-one rule

The one-for-one rule will not apply, as there is no incremental change in administrative burden on businesses. Licensed hatcheries already import SE-tested hatching eggs from the United States under the current certification process and maintain the necessary documentation to prove compliance; as such, no new costs will be incurred. There is also no repeal or addition of regulations.

Amendment 4: Reduce the prescriptiveness of traceability labelling requirements for hatching eggs and chicks leaving a hatchery

Issues

Traceability codes on products are essential in being able to conduct traceback in the event of a disease or food safety issue. The industry practice for hatcheries is to generate codes or labels that effectively trace their product’s origin. However, the traceability requirements set under the amended Health of Animals Regulations for licensed hatcheries and supply flocks (Part VIII.1 of the HAR) specifically require the traceability code to be the premises identification (PID) number.

PID numbers are issued by provincial ministries of agriculture to various agricultural sites, and can be used to identify specific sites, including poultry farms. Industry stakeholders have stated that requiring a PID number to be marked on packages of eggs and chicks leaving hatcheries is unnecessarily prescriptive and does not align with industry practices. Since the HAR expressly require licensed hatcheries to use the PID number as the traceability code, a regulatory amendment is needed to allow flexibility and permit the use of a hatchery-generated identifier code.

Background

In 2022, amendments to the HAR were made for hatcheries and supply flocks to require licensed hatcheries to have a traceability program and to include a traceability code on every box or package of eggs or chicks to allow them to be traced back to the supply flock. Specifically, the HAR require this traceability code to be the PID number of the supply flock from which the eggs or chicks originate.

The CFIA has determined that requiring licensed hatcheries to specifically identify the supply flock producer, including the PID number, on the package or documentation going to commercial farms does not significantly improve the ability to conduct traceback and poses business challenges for this sector. Requiring hatcheries to label each shipment with the PID number creates logistical complications when multiple flocks contribute to a hatch, increases administrative workload, and necessitates costly system changes. A hatchery-generated identifier code, which could be any alphanumeric format and amended from time-to-time (e.g. corresponding to a hatch day), on the packaging and/or accompanying documentation would support the intent of this provision to support traceability, while removing unnecessary burden for hatcheries.

Legislative and regulatory authorities

The Health of Animals Act establishes a legislative framework to prevent the introduction or spread of diseases within Canada that affect animals or may be transmitted from animals to people. It includes broad regulation-making authorities to protect human and animal health.

The Health of Animals Regulations (Part VIII.1 of the HAR — Hatcheries and Supply Flocks) were published and came into force on November 9, 2023. Section 72.8 of the HAR prescribes that the PID number must be included on packages or documentation of eggs and chicks.

Provincial and territorial context

The CFIA and provincial/territorial governments share responsibility for protecting animal and public health through initiatives like the traceability program. Provincial/territorial governments have established PID programs, which assign unique identifiers. While PID programs are managed provincially, the requirement to use PID numbers as a traceability code is a federal requirement. The regulatory amendment will modify only the federal requirement. This change will not affect the role or administration of provincial/territorial governments.

International context

The goal of the amendment is to reflect domestic testing standards in the importation process of eggs sourced from the United States. As such, the changes do not impact international trade with other countries, nor do they affect the export of eggs to other countries.

Objective

The objective of the amendments is to provide flexibility to licensed hatcheries for supply flock identification. With this change, hatcheries could use their own generated identifier code, but would also be able to continue using a PID number if they wish to do so. Aligning regulatory requirements with current industry practices enhances stakeholder cooperation and reduces administrative burden.

Description

Subsection 72.8(1) of the HAR will be amended to broaden the traceability code requirement to a lot code or unique identifier that enables the eggs or chicks to be traced back to the supply flock from which the eggs or chicks originate. While the specific requirement to use a PID number will be removed, the provision remains broad enough to allow licensed hatcheries to continue using PID numbers should they choose to do so.

Regulatory development

Consultation

The CFIA held targeted engagement in winter 2025 with the domestic hatchery sector following outreach initiated by the industry regarding this issue. Stakeholder support for the amendment was confirmed.

Regulatory analysis

Economic context

Canada has 82 licensed hatcheries for various species and purposes. In 2023, hatchery exports totalled $86 million, and imports reached $116.4 million, with nearly all imports coming from the United States.

Stakeholders

The following stakeholders are expected to be impacted by the amendments:

Benefits and costs
Stakeholder benefits

The amendment to the HAR to allow licensed hatcheries the option of using their own hatchery-generated identifier codes is designed to provide greater operational flexibility. As this change is optional (hatcheries can still use PID numbers if they wish) and aligns with industry practices, it is expected to have a positive impact without adding new obligations.

Stakeholder costs

These regulatory amendments will not impose additional costs on the industry, as they do not introduce new requirements. Most hatcheries already apply some form of traceability identifier. The flexibility to use a PID number, a lot code or a unique identifier allows them to meet the requirement within existing resources.

Government of Canada benefits

The amendment offers operational efficiencies by reducing the need for CFIA oversight and enforcement related to prescriptive traceability code requirements. By enabling licensed hatcheries to use a lot code or unique identifier, the amendment supports a more flexible, risk-based approach to compliance. This allows the CFIA to better allocate resources toward higher-risk areas, while still maintaining the integrity of traceability systems.

Government of Canada costs

There are no costs to the Government of Canada, as there will be no changes to CFIA’s food inspection oversight and the CFIA will update its operational guidance for CFIA inspectors within existing resources.

One-for-one rule

The one-for-one rule will not apply, as there is no incremental change in administrative burden on businesses. There is also no repeal or addition of regulations.

Small business lens

The small business lens applies, as Statistics Canada indicates that 99.2% of businesses in the poultry and egg production industry are small businesses. The amendment is not expected to impose any new costs, as it does not add new requirements. In fact, it is expected to benefit small businesses by offering more flexibility and allowing hatcheries to meet existing traceability obligations using formats already integrated into their operations, such as hatchery-generated lot codes.

Amendments to the Safe Food for Canadians Regulations

Amendment 5: Remove prescriptive labelling requirements for fresh fruits and vegetables

Issues

Some of Canada’s labelling requirements for fresh fruits and vegetables (FFV) are overly prescriptive and create regulatory burden. Stakeholders have raised the following issues:

Background

Food labelling requirements under the SFCR are designed to ensure that consumers receive clear, accurate and accessible information about the food they purchase. Food labelling is one of the most important and direct means of communication between consumers and industry.

When FFV are prepackaged, it is required to have a label with certain information. FFV are considered prepackaged when they are packaged for consumers (e.g. a bag of mini cucumbers sold at a grocery store), or packaged for shipping purposes (e.g. in FFV packaged in shipping or bulk containers). The SFCR identifies mandatory labelling requirements for prepackaged FFV. This includes the common name of the FFV, net quantity, name and principal place of business, grade, country of origin (when imported) and size designation (some exceptions apply). These mandatory requirements are required to be a certain font size based on the size of the principal display surface (PDS).

Federal legislative and regulatory authorities

The Government of Canada oversees food labelling to protect consumers and ensure a fair marketplace. This responsibility is shared between Health Canada and the CFIA.

Health Canada is responsible for setting regulations, policies and standards relating to the health, safety, and nutritional quality of food sold in Canada (e.g. labelling requirements about the nutrients in food) under the Food and Drugs Act (FDA) and the Food and Drug Regulations (FDR).

The CFIA is responsible for the administration and enforcement of the Safe Food for Canadians Act (SFCA) and the SFCR, including regulations pertaining to labelling and grading. The CFIA is also responsible for administering the non-health and safety food labelling requirements in the FDA and FDR, and enforcing all the requirements.

Provincial and territorial context

Federal FFV labelling requirements apply to all food sold in Canada, as well as food sold internationally.

Provincial regulations may also have their own labelling requirements that apply to FFV sold within that province.

International context

Canada is a member of the Codex Alimentarius (Codex), an intergovernmental body under the World Health Organization. The amendments remain aligned with Codex labelling standards.

Key trading partners, such as the United States and the United Kingdom, have less prescriptive labelling requirements for FFV. Aligning Canada’s approach with international standards promotes regulatory cooperation and supports trade with key partners, ultimately enhancing market access and competitiveness for Canadian producers.

Objective

The objective of the amendments is to reduce red tape and overly prescriptive requirements to reduce regulatory burden and industry costs and to support trade, without compromising food safety or consumer protection.

Description

The following amendments will be made to the SFCR:

Regulatory development

Consultation

Stakeholders have raised the FFV labelling issues with the CFIA through various meetings and correspondence since 2021. In May 2025, industry stakeholders were consulted and provided strong support for all the labelling amendments.

Regulatory analysis

Economic context

The profile of the FFV industry is broken down by greenhouse and farm production. In 2023, total sales of greenhouse fruits and vegetables was $2.5 billion. Ontario accounted for 67.5% of greenhouse fruit and vegetable sales, followed by British Columbia (14.9%), Quebec (10.9%) and Alberta (5.9%). The increase in sales in 2023 was attributable to higher production of peppers (9.3%), tomatoes (9.3%) and cucumbers (8.3%), which accounted for the majority (92.1%) of total greenhouse fruit and vegetable sales.

In 2024, Canada produced a total of 3.3 billion kilograms of fruits and vegetables, with a farm-gate value of $3.0 billion ($1.7 billion for vegetables and $1.3 billion for fruits). The total fruit and vegetable cultivated area is around 243 000 hectares.

Vegetable production, based on farm-gate value, was highly concentrated in Ontario and Quebec. Ontario had 49.2% of the total cultivated area, followed by Quebec with 36.8%, the Prairie provinces with 5.3% and the Atlantic provinces with 3.6%. In terms of total fruit cultivated area, Quebec accounted for 34.8%, Atlantic provinces with 31.3%, Ontario with 13.7% and British Columbia 18.9%.

Stakeholders

The following stakeholders are expected to be impacted by the amendments:

Benefits and costs
Benefits to stakeholders

The amendments to the labelling requirements will benefit industry by reducing regulatory burden and prescriptiveness. This additional flexibility will also support trade by aligning with trading partners that have less prescriptive requirements (e.g. the United States and the United Kingdom.

For example, the amendment to the font size requirements for shipping containers/case will support trade by aligning with labelling standards adopted by the industry in both Canada and the United States to enhance traceability throughout the supply chain (i.e. the Produce Traceability Initiative [PTI]). In addition, the amendment to exempt certain consumer packaged FFV from the net quantity statement on a label aligns with the net quantity requirements in the United States and the United Kingdom.

Costs to stakeholders

Given that the amendments to FFV labelling are removing requirements and will not trigger the industry to print new labels, there are no incremental costs to the industry. There may be cost savings for the industry if smaller labels can be made as a result of the amendments to the font size requirements.

Government of Canada benefits

There is no impact on CFIA resources because of the labelling amendments. CFIA compliance and enforcement of the labelling requirements will remain the same.

Government of Canada costs

There is no impact on CFIA resources because of the amendments. CFIA compliance and enforcement of the labelling and grade requirements will remain the same. Minor costs will be incurred by the CFIA to update existing guidance for CFIA inspectors and industry (including the Industry Labelling Tool). These costs will be absorbed with existing resources.

Small business lens

According to Statistics Canada, small businesses account for 90% of the total number of businesses in the food and beverage industry. Small business lens applies, as businesses will benefit from the removal or increased flexibility of labelling requirements.

One-for-one rule

The one-for-one rule does not apply, as there is no incremental change in administrative burden on businesses and no regulatory titles are repealed or introduced. Changes to labelling requirements are voluntary and are not related to the demonstration of compliance with regulations. As a result, the burden relief provided by these regulations does not qualify as a reduction of administrative burden for the purpose of the one-for-one rule.

Amendment 6: Modernize Canada’s approach to FFV grades by transferring certain grades to industry and removing mandatory grades for FFV to be processed

Issues

FFV grades describe product quality requirements, such as colour, size, maturity, firmness, shape and condition of the food. Grades are used to categorize produce based on quality attributes into different grade classes, such as “Canada No. 1” for carrots, cantaloups, grapes, etc. Produce assessed as having a higher grade is sold at a higher price when traded.

Canada maintains 31 grades for FFV in the Canadian Grade Compendium: Volume 2 - Fresh Fruit or Vegetables (CGC: Volume 2) document, which is incorporated by reference in the SFCR and maintained and enforced by the CFIA. These grades are primarily for traditional produce (tomatoes, apples, potatoes, onions, etc.) and have very prescriptive and outdated requirements, which can hinder innovation and competitiveness. For example, prescriptive requirements for tomato grades have made it difficult for heirloom tomatoes to meet grade standards, since they have variable colours and shapes compared to traditional tomatoes (uniform colour, shape, etc.). Overly prescriptive grade requirements can inhibit innovation of new products and varieties, or advancements in production methods (e.g. greenhouse and vertical farming).

There is strong industry demand to modernize FFV grades to support innovation and increase the competitiveness of Canadian businesses. As the industry is best placed to update the FFV grades when consumer preferences change or when new technologies or products are developed, transferring the authority to maintain Canada’s FFV grades from the CFIA to an industry body will provide improved agility.

In addition, the current FFV grade requirements apply to FFV that will be manufactured, processed or preserved. Grades for this type of produce are unnecessary given that they will be processed and made into something else (e.g. apples used in apple juice, fruit used in yogurt cups, cucumbers used to make pickles). Removing this mandatory grading requirement will remove a regulatory burden for the industry and will provide the flexibility for the industry to use FFV that doesn’t meet the aesthetic requirements, such as misshaped or smaller sized FFV, in manufactured, processed or preserved foods.

Currently, when there is a supply shortage, an administrative process exists for businesses to request an exemption for FFV, for which grades are prescribed and that are destined for manufacturing, processing or preservation. The regulatory requirement to request ministerial exemptions (MEs) remains unchanged; however, this change will reduce the number of situations where they will be needed, thereby eliminating the associated costs and administrative burden.

Background

Grades are used by industry as a common trading language to set prices and settle trading disputes. While the SFCR governs federal FFV grades, grades do not play a role in food safety, consumer protection or nutritional value. Other provisions of the SFCR and FDR govern food safety, such as prohibitions against selling food in an unsanitary condition.

Previous work to modernize the grades focused on making changes to FFV grades one at a time. This work was slow and imposed burden on both industry and CFIA. As such, the CFIA consulted with industry to explore a new approach for developing and maintaining FFV grade standards. A public consultation took place between July 22, 2024, and October 2024. Almost half of the stakeholders that participated in the consultation supported the option to give ownership of the IBR document for FFV grade standards to an industry body, such as the Fruit and Vegetable Dispute Resolution Corporation (DRC). Transferring authority to an industry body to maintain and update grades will allow the document to be more responsive to industry needs, innovations and market competitiveness.

The CFIA has a similar arrangement with the Canadian Beef Grading Agency (CBGA). The CFIA transferred responsibility to the CBGA, who maintains the Beef, Bison and Veal Carcass Grade Requirements, which are incorporated by reference into the SFCR.

Federal legislative and regulatory authorities

The Safe Food for Canadians Act (SFCA) establishes a modern legislative framework for the safety of food commodities. It provides broad regulation-making authorities for food commodities.

The SFCR set out the regulatory requirements to ensure the food safety of various food commodities. This includes licensing, preventative controls, traceability, labelling, packaging and grading. It also prescribes 31 grades FFV in the CGC: Volume 2, a document that is incorporated by reference on an ambulatory basis. This means the FFV grades, as set out in CGC: Volume 2, can be modified from time to time in accordance with the CFIA Incorporation by Reference Policy. Grade standard requirements for FFV imported from the United States are contained in a separate document, which is also incorporated by reference into the SFCR and can be amended from time to time by the CFIA. In addition, the SFCR specifies specific FFV grading requirements to import onions, potatoes and apples (sections 113 to 119).

Businesses selling FFV in Canada must meet the grade standards listed CGC: Volume 2, except for fresh blueberries, cantaloups, crab apples, cranberries, field rhubarb and strawberries, as the grades for these FFV are considered optional (paragraph 306(2)(c) of the SFCR). Whenever a grade is used, whether on a mandatory or optional basis, the FFV must meet the grade requirements.

Provincial and territorial context

Various provincial acts also regulate food grades. However, some provincial governments have repealed their grades. For example, in 2011, Ontario repealed their FFV grades.

International context

There is no single or common approach to grade oversight among Canada’s main trading partners (e.g. the United States, the European Union, the United Kingdom and New Zealand). FFV grade frameworks are designed to fit unique national and market characteristics and are generally voluntary.

For example, under federal U.S. import requirements, most FFV grades are voluntary; however, there are some exceptions. For instance, onions, potatoes and tomatoes imported from Canada must meet the same grade, size, quality and maturity standards as U.S. products. The United States recognizes Canadian potato and onion grades as equivalent, which facilitates access to the U.S. market for Canadian growers. The responsibility for potato and onion grade standards will remain with the CFIA and will not be transferred to industry to ensure continued access.

Objective

The objective of the amendments is to allow FFV grade standards to be more responsive to industry needs, support innovations and enable market competitiveness.

Description

The authority to maintain FFV grades (except for onions, potatoes and apples) will be transferred from the CFIA to the DRC. Section 1 of the SFCR will be amended to reference the new IBR document entitled the “Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Grade Requirements” that will be maintained by the DRC on an ambulatory basis. Section 305, paragraphs 306(1)(b), (c), 306(4)(a) and (c), section 307 and paragraphs 308(1)(b) and 312(a) will also be updated to reflect the short name of the external IBR, Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Grades Document .

Given that the SFCR have specific grading import requirements for onions, potatoes and apples (sections 113 to 119) and these requirements support the trade of these FFV, the grades will not be transferred to the industry body. The CFIA will continue to maintain the grade standards for onions, potatoes and apples in the CGC: Volume 2. However, the reference to the new IBR document will also be included in sections 113 to 119 to provide the flexibility for the CFIA to transfer these grades to the Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Grade Requirement document in the future without requiring a regulatory change. Should there be a conflict between the two grades IBR documents in the future, the CFIA’s CGC: Volume 2 will take precedence.

The CFIA will establish a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the DRC to set appropriate terms regarding grade updates (e.g. conditions that grades aim to be less prescriptive where possible, not conflict with trade obligations, and meet SFCR requirements).

The DRC will maintain the FFV grade document and develop new grades according to the conditions set in the MOU and in accordance with the CFIA Incorporation by Reference Policy, as well as the Treasury Board of Canada Secretariat’s Guide to Incorporation by Reference in Federal Regulations. The CFIA will be responsible for providing a final analysis of the updates to ensure conformity with the SFCR and trade obligations and will continue to be responsible for enforcing the grades. The CFIA will also remain responsible for updating the FFV grades IBR document for FFV imports from the United States to ensure parity.

Prior to the transfer to the DRC, the CFIA updated the FFV IBR documents to reflect previous stakeholder consultations, reduce the prescriptiveness of the standards, streamline the definitions, reduce overlap with the SFCR requirements, and remove labelling and container size requirements from the grading standards that are already captured elsewhere in the SFCR.

An amendment will also be made to subsection 306(1) to remove the mandatory grading requirement for FFV to be manufactured, processed or preserved.

Regulatory development

Consultation

Between July and October 2024, the CFIA conducted a public consultation on identifying a new approach for developing and maintaining Canadian FFV grade standards. The option to transfer the ownership of the IBR document to an industry body, such as the DRC, received support from half of the participants. The CFIA also received letters of support for this option.

In May and June 2025, stakeholders reconfirmed their support for the amendment to transfer the ownership of the FFV grades IBR to the DRC, through letters of support and stakeholder engagement. Stakeholders also confirmed their support for the CFIA to update the IBR documents, as well as the amendment to remove the mandatory FFV grade requirement for processed FFV products.

Regulatory analysis for FFV amendments to the SFCR

Stakeholders

The same stakeholders impacted by the prescriptive labelling requirements for FFV will be impacted by this amendment as well (see list above).

Benefits and costs
Benefits to stakeholders

As the industry is best placed to update the FFV grades when consumer preferences change or when new technologies or products are developed, transferring the authority to the DRC to set and maintain Canada’s FFV grades will provide improved agility.

The removal of the mandatory grading requirement for FFV that will be manufactured, processed or preserved will provide flexibility for the industry to use FFV that do not meet the grade standards for these products. For example, businesses will be able to purchase misshaped or smaller FFV to make other products (e.g. carrots purchased to make carrot cake will no longer have to meet the carrot grade standards). As a result, there may be greater availability of produce and cost savings to processors associated with purchasing lower-cost ungraded produce.

In the case where there is a supply shortage of a certain FFV, businesses may request a ministerial exemption (ME) from the requirement to grade FFV intended to be further processed. Removing the mandatory grading requirement for FFV intended for manufacturing, processing or preserving will remove the need for businesses to apply for an ME and eliminate the associated costs and administrative burden. Specifically, the industry will no longer have to pay the ME application fees ($23.99 per load) and there will be a reduction in administrative costs related to the preparation of ME applications (see the “One-for-one rule” section below). It is estimated that the regulatory amendment to remove the mandatory grading requirement for FFV to be manufactured, processed or preserved will lead to a reduced number of annual ME applications, which is currently on average 247 for this purpose.

Costs to stakeholders

Any costs to maintain and update the FFV grades will be incurred by the DRC.

Government of Canada benefits

While the CFIA will still play an active role in FFV grade updates, there will be a reduced role in the development and consultation of proposals to update the FFV grade standards. This will allow the CFIA to focus resources on areas of higher risk.

The CFIA will also benefit from the amendment to remove the mandatory grading requirement for FFV to be manufactured, processed or preserved, as the CFIA will no longer need to process ME requests for this type of FFV when there are FFV shortages.

Government of Canada costs

There is no impact on CFIA resources because of the amendments. CFIA compliance and enforcement of grade requirements will remain the same.

Small business lens

The small business lens applies, as there are benefits for small FFV businesses because of the regulatory amendments. According to Statistics Canada, small businesses account for 90% of the total number of businesses in the food and beverage industry. Given that the regulatory amendments will not impose any incremental costs to the industry, CFIA deemed it unnecessary to consider other options for small businesses.

Small businesses will benefit from the removal of the mandatory aesthetic requirements to grade FFV to be manufactured, processed or preserved. This provides the flexibility to use ungraded FFV in processed foods, allows for greater availability of produce and cost savings to processors associated with purchasing lower-cost ungraded produce.

In the case where there is a supply shortage of a certain FFV, small businesses may benefit from no longer having to request an ME from the grading requirement for FFV intended to be further processed. The estimated total annualized benefit to small businesses related to the MEs is $27,483 or $125 per impacted business.

Summary of small business lens
Table 1: Benefits
Description of benefit Present value Annualized value
Ministerial exemption application (complete and submit form) $195,558 $27,843
Average net impact on each impacted small business
(Net impact divided by number of impacted small businesses)		 $881 $125
One-for-one rule

The one-for-one rule applies, since there is an incremental decrease in administrative burden on businesses related to no longer applying for an ME during certain FFV supply shortages and to be exempted from the grading requirement for FFV to be manufactured, processed or preserved. The amendments are considered a relief of the burden under the rule, and no regulatory titles have been repealed or introduced. The amendments will result in an annualized administrative total savings of $9,723 to business owners who will no longer apply for an ME to the grading requirements for FFV intended to be further processed.

As per the Red Tape Reduction Regulations, the assessment of administrative impacts was conducted for a period of 10 years commencing from registration. All values listed in this section are presented in 2012 dollars, discounted to 2012 at a rate of 7%.

The amendments related to ministerial exemption application (to complete and submit the form) represent an annualized total savings of $9,723 to 247 businesses. Each business will save 2.5 hours by no longer completing this task once per year for FFV intended to be further processed. The average wage (including overhead) of the responsible individual is estimated to be $37.95 (in 2012$).

Table 2: Estimated administrative impacts under the one-for-one rule (Can$, 2012 prices)
Description Annualized value table 2 note *
Decrease in administrative burden from ME applications $9,723.13
Estimated number of impacted businesses 247 table 2 note **
Annualized decrease in administrative burden per impacted businesses $39.36

Table 2 note(s)

Table 2 note *

Values were calculated using 2012 as the base year and a 7% discount rate.

Return to table 2 note * referrer

Table 2 note **

Total number of annual application reduction was estimated to be 247 (based on 2019 to 2024 data). It was assumed that one application equates to one business.

Return to table 2 note ** referrer

The estimated decrease in administrative burden was based on information from CFIA data provided by subject matter experts and the Regulations Amending the Safe Food for Canadians Regulations, the Regulations Amending the Food and Drug Regulations and related Regulations Amending the Cannabis Regulations, published in 2022 in the Canada Gazette, Part II.

Regulatory development

Indigenous engagement, consultation and modern treaty obligations

The assessment of modern treaty implications examined the geographical scope and subject matter of the initiative in relation to modern treaties in effect and did not identify any applicable modern treaty.

As part of broader Government of Canada’s priorities and obligations, in alignment with the spirit of the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples Act, this assessment considered Indigenous communities that may not have a treaty with the Crown or a historical treaty with the Crown, in addition to modern treaties.

Given that the amendments are relieving in nature and are not expected to disproportionately impact Indigenous peoples or groups, specific engagement was not undertaken. Additionally, no public consultation was held; instead, targeted engagement focused on key industry stakeholder associations.

While the limited scope and nature of the amendments are not expected to affect Indigenous rights or interests, the initiative may offer opportunities to promote broader Indigenous inclusion. By reducing regulatory burdens and enhancing flexibility, the amendments have the potential to support increased participation by Indigenous agricultural and agri-food producers in the sector.

Instrument choice

The status quo was evaluated for each regulatory amendment and IBR update. However, maintaining the current status would have preserved unnecessary or overly prescriptive requirements, limiting opportunities to reduce red tape and support innovation. Additionally, specific stakeholder issues would not be addressed without these regulatory amendments.

Regulatory analysis

Regulatory cooperation and alignment

The amendments to the HAR and IRD do not impact Canada’s obligations under the WOAH. In addition, the changes to the IRD are limited in scope and do not affect broader regulatory cooperation or alignment initiatives between Canada and its international partners.

The amendments to the SFCR are consistent with Codex standards. Further, changes to FFV labelling support regulatory cooperation, as they help to align Canadian labelling requirements for FFV in Canada with that of the United States, the United Kingdom and other trading partners. For example, the amendment to the font size requirements for shipping containers/cases aligns with labelling standards adopted by the industry in both Canada and the United States to enhance traceability throughout the supply chain as part of the Produce Traceability Initiative.

Effects on the environment

In accordance with the Cabinet Directive on Strategic Environmental and Economic Assessment (SEEA Directive), a comprehensive strategic environmental and economic assessment has been conducted. Regulatory proposals subject to the Cabinet Directive on Regulation are exempted from the economic analysis elements of the SEEA Directive. The findings from the strategic environmental and economic assessment conclude that there are no significant impacts on the environment because of the amendments to the HAR and the SFCR. However, some of the amendments may have minor positive effects. For example, converting the IRD into an ambulatory IBR document will contribute to improved animal health and biodiversity by enhancing CFIA’s ability to quickly respond to emerging animal diseases and risks, some of which may be heightened by climate change.

Gender-based analysis plus

The amendments will directly impact the agriculture and agri-food sector. According to the 2021 Census of Agriculture, farm operators are predominantly men, but the proportion of operators who are women has grown 4% since 2001, now representing 30% of farm operators.footnote 4 In 2021, Indigenous peoples represented 2.8%footnote 5 and immigrants represented 7% of the farm population.footnote 6 In the same year, racialized groups, including Indigenous peoples, represented 4% of the farm population.footnote 7 The regulatory amendments are not expected to have a disproportionate impact on women, immigrants, racialized groups or Indigenous peoples. In addition, in 2021, the national average age of farm operators in Canada was 56footnote 8 and the average total income for farm families was $214, 089.footnote 9 Therefore, the amendments will mostly impact older generations with higher incomes.

Implementation, compliance and enforcement, and service standards

Implementation

The regulatory amendments to the HAR and SFCR will come into force on the date they are registered.

Once the regulatory amendments come into force, guidance for the industry will be updated (including the Industry Labelling Tool and AIRS) and shared with stakeholders. The CFIA will also conduct promotional activities to ensure stakeholders are aware of the regulatory amendments and their implications (e.g. distributing messages through its email subscription service and posting updates on its social media accounts). The CFIA will also update internal guidance for CFIA and CBSA inspectors where applicable.

The updates to the documents incorporated by reference, the IRD, the Units of Measurement for the Net Quantity Declaration of Certain Foods, and the FFV IBR documents, will be published and come into force the same day as the regulatory amendments are published.

Compliance and enforcement

There are no changes to CFIA’s compliance and enforcement regime related to these amendments. While the CFIA is responsible for administering and enforcing the HAA, HAR, SFCA and SFCR, it is the legal responsibility of regulated parties to comply with all the regulatory requirements that apply to them. The CFIA promotes compliance by providing regulated parties with the tools, resources, guidance and services they may need to become familiar with and follow regulatory requirements. Using a risk-informed approach, the CFIA conducts inspections to verify that regulatory requirements are being met. When they are not, CFIA may use control actions to address any immediate risk, as well as enforcement actions once non-compliance has been determined.

Contact

Lindsay Wild
Director
Regulatory, Legislative and Economic Affairs
Canadian Food Inspection Agency
1400 Merivale Road
Ottawa, Ontario
K1A 0Y9
Email: cfia.legislation-legislation.acia@inspection.gc.ca