Bioengineered Food (GMO) Labeling

Since January 1, 2022, food manufacturers selling products in the United States must disclose whether their food is bioengineered — the federal term for what most people call GMO (genetically modified organism). The National Bioengineered Food Disclosure Standard, established under 7 U.S.C. §§ 1639–1639c and administered by USDA, created a single, uniform national disclosure system and simultaneously preempted all state and local GMO labeling laws — ending the patchwork of state requirements that had been building since Vermont passed its own law in 2014.

The law replaced "GMO" in the federal vocabulary with the term "bioengineering" — defined narrowly as a food whose genetic material was altered through in vitro recombinant DNA techniques in a way that could not occur through conventional breeding or be found in nature. That definition matters for what falls in and out of the requirement.

Current Law (2026)

Legal Authority

• 7 U.S.C. § 1639 — Definitions ("bioengineering" = in vitro recombinant DNA modification not achievable through conventional breeding; food = for human consumption; Secretary = Secretary of Agriculture)
• 7 U.S.C. § 1639a — Applicability (covers foods subject to FDCA labeling; covers meat/poultry/egg only if the primary or secondary ingredient would independently require FDCA labeling)
• 7 U.S.C. § 1639b — Establishment of national standard (USDA required to publish standard within 2 years of July 29, 2016; sets disclosure form options; preempts state laws for interstate commerce foods; bars food recalls based solely on disclosure status)
• 7 U.S.C. § 1639c — Savings provisions (consistent with international trade obligations; doesn't affect FDA or TTB authority; not disclosing does not create a "non-GMO" or "not bioengineered" claim)
• 7 U.S.C. § 1639i — Federal preemption (states and localities may not require labeling of any food or seed as genetically engineered, including restaurant food)
• 7 U.S.C. § 1639j — Exclusion from preemption (does not preempt state or federal common law remedies)

How It Works

What Counts as "Bioengineered"

USDA's 2018 rule (7 C.F.R. Part 66) established a List of Bioengineered Foods — the foods for which the rule presumes that bioengineered varieties exist in the marketplace. If your food contains an ingredient from that list (corn, soybeans, canola, cotton, potatoes, papaya, summer squash, alfalfa, pink-flesh pineapple, apples, and others), you need to either verify whether your specific ingredient is bioengineered or apply the disclosure. Highly refined ingredients like corn oil or high-fructose corn syrup that no longer contain detectable modified genetic material generally do not trigger the requirement under USDA's current interpretation — a controversial decision that critics say exempts most processed food ingredients from disclosure.

Disclosure Options

Manufacturers can choose how to disclose:

• Text: "Contains a bioengineered food ingredient"
• Symbol: The USDA "BE" symbol (a green circle with a sun/field image)
• Electronic/digital link: A QR code or similar scannable link — but the on-package text must say only "Scan here for more food information" or equivalent; the linked page must show the disclosure on the first product information page (not ads); must include a phone number option; and cannot collect or use consumer data
• Phone number: For small packages where a QR code isn't practical

Preemption of State Laws

The law ends Vermont's 2014 GMO labeling law and any other state requirements. No state can require labeling about whether a food is genetically engineered — including for restaurant food. The preemption covers any label, packaging, or disclosure format, including "may contain" style statements. States retain their common law remedies (fraud, breach of warranty) under § 1639j.

Enforcement

Violating the disclosure requirement is a prohibited act. USDA can audit records and conduct examinations, must provide notice and hearing before publishing audit results, and makes summaries public. But USDA cannot order a food recall solely because a food lacks or bears an incorrect bioengineered disclosure — recall authority under this statute is zero.

How It Affects You

If you're a consumer who wants to know if your food is bioengineered: Look for one of three disclosure formats on the package: the text "Contains a bioengineered food ingredient," the USDA "BE" green circular logo, or a QR code with the instruction to scan for more food information. Foods that are most likely to carry BE disclosure include products with identifiable ingredients from the List of Bioengineered Foods — specifically products that contain corn, soybeans, canola, or cotton (the four most widely grown bioengineered crops in the U.S.). A box of cereal made with corn or a soy-based meat substitute from a major manufacturer almost certainly triggers disclosure. But here's the important catch: highly refined ingredients like high-fructose corn syrup, corn starch, soybean oil, and canola oil are generally not required to disclose under USDA's interpretation, because those ingredients no longer contain detectable modified genetic material after processing. This means most processed foods made with commodity corn and soy — chips, crackers, salad dressings, most cooking oils — may carry no BE disclosure at all, even though the source crops are overwhelmingly bioengineered.

If you want stronger assurance: Two third-party certification programs provide stricter "non-GMO" guarantees than the federal disclosure standard: (1) Non-GMO Project Verified — a private nonprofit that requires supply chain traceability and testing for high-risk ingredients; and (2) USDA Organic — which prohibits the use of bioengineering by definition, so any USDA Organic-certified food is also non-bioengineered. Neither program is controlled by USDA's BE standard; they operate on independent supply chain verification. If you're a consumer for whom avoiding bioengineered ingredients is important, the Non-GMO Project butterfly logo or the USDA Organic seal provides more assurance than the BE disclosure alone.

If you don't have a smartphone for QR codes: Manufacturers using a QR code for disclosure are required by USDA rules to also provide a toll-free phone number on the package. Call the number and ask about bioengineered ingredients — that's a federal requirement. The QR code access gap has been a persistent criticism of the law from consumer groups who argue rural, elderly, and low-income shoppers are disproportionately unable to access the disclosure. USDA has not addressed this gap with regulatory action as of April 2026.

If you're a food manufacturer deciding how to comply: The main practical choices are: (1) use the text disclosure — clear and requires no technology access by consumers; (2) use the USDA BE symbol — standardized and internationally recognizable; (3) use a QR code with phone number backup — preferred by some large manufacturers because the linked page can carry more product information. If you use listed crop ingredients (corn, soy, canola, cotton, sugar beet, alfalfa, papaya, summer squash, pink-flesh pineapple, potatoes, or apples), you must either verify your specific supply chain to determine if bioengineered varieties are present or disclose. The burden of proof for a non-disclosure position is a supply chain documentation system, not just an assertion.

If you want to market your product as "Non-GMO" or "Not Bioengineered": The law explicitly prohibits using those phrases solely because your food didn't trigger the federal disclosure requirement. You need affirmative documentation — either Non-GMO Project verification or USDA Organic certification — or you risk FTC scrutiny for deceptive advertising. Many manufacturers learned this the hard way; a "Non-GMO" claim without a verification program backing it is legally precarious.

State Variations

State GMO labeling laws are preempted — no state may require disclosure beyond the federal standard for interstate commerce food. Vermont's law, Maine's contingent law, and Connecticut's contingent law were all superseded when the federal standard took effect in 2022.

Pending Legislation

No major pending legislation as of April 2026. Advocacy groups continue to push for closing the "highly refined ingredient" exemption.

Recent Developments

• USDA Bioengineered Food List status (2026): USDA periodically updates the List of Bioengineered Foods to add new crops. As of April 2026, the list includes alfalfa, arctic apples (non-browning), canola, corn, cotton, eggplant, papaya, pineapple (pink flesh), potatoes, salmon (AquAdvantage), soybeans, summer squash, and sugar beets. Foods derived from these crops with detectable modified genetic material trigger the disclosure obligation
• Refined ingredient exemption criticism: The most persistent controversy in the program is USDA's position that highly refined ingredients without detectable modified genetic material — including most high-fructose corn syrup, most corn starch, and most soybean oil — are not required to disclose. Consumer and environmental advocacy groups, including the Center for Food Safety, have argued this creates a de facto exemption for the majority of bioengineered crop derivatives in processed food. USDA has not moved to change this interpretation as of April 2026
• 2025 Farm Bill discussions: Farm Bill negotiations in the 118th and 119th Congresses included industry and advocacy group proposals on both sides — some seeking to close the refined ingredient exemption, others seeking to further limit the scope of disclosure. The farm bill's ultimate fate will affect whether Congress revisits the bioengineered food disclosure standard
• QR code access gap: USDA's original 2017 consumer access study that justified the QR code option has not been updated, despite ongoing criticism from accessibility advocates. The agency has not taken regulatory action to require text disclosure as a default or to phase out QR-code-only labeling
• State preemption intact: All state bioengineered/GMO labeling requirements remain preempted under the federal standard. Vermont's 2016 GMO labeling law, which briefly created the only mandatory state GMO disclosure requirement before being superseded, has no surviving operative effect