August AAFCO meeting raises new questions on pet food labels

The August 2026 AAFCO annual meeting highlighted a growing tension in pet food regulation: after years of work on label modernization, regulators and industry still aren’t aligned on what implementation will look like at the state level. Reporting from Truth about Pet Food said the most notable discussions focused on the dietary fiber disclosure requirement and on broader concerns that some states may be reluctant to adopt the updated model regulations into law. The meeting itself took place August 26-28, 2026, in San Diego. (truthaboutpetfood.com)

That friction has been building for years. AAFCO launched its Pet Food Label Modernization project in 2015 to update model regulations for pet food and specialty pet food labeling, with the revised framework published in the 2024 Official Publication. The goal has been to make labels more useful and more consistent, while giving regulators and manufacturers time to transition. Earlier AAFCO materials described a multiyear rollout, and prior AAFCO-linked planning documents suggested many states were still at different stages of adoption, with some unsure of their implementation dates. (aafco.org)

At the August meeting, one flashpoint was the requirement to declare dietary fiber on labels. Truth about Pet Food described discussion in the Ingredient Definitions Committee about whether that requirement could be delayed, and interpreted the exchange as a sign that parts of industry remain uneasy with the updated labeling framework. In the Pet Food Committee session, the same outlet reported that some states are hesitant to adopt the new label rules and that some manufacturers have learned the updated labels may not be accepted in certain export markets. Based on that account, the 2030 deadline is still on the table, but no longer looks assured. (truthaboutpetfood.com)

The meeting also appears to have underscored how labeling and ingredient regulation are now colliding. In a separate but related development, FDA published a proposed rule on August 11, 2026, that would require GRAS notifications for substances added to human or animal food. For animal food, FDA proposed an exemption for ingredients listed in Chapter 6 of the 2024 AAFCO Official Publication, so long as FDA has not publicly raised a GRAS concern. But the agency’s draft text is tied to the 2024 edition specifically, which means later ingredients, including those that move through AAFCO’s Scientific Review of Ingredient Submissions process, may not receive the same treatment if the rule is finalized as written. (govinfo.gov)

Industry coverage shows AAFCO is already pushing back on that point. PetfoodIndustry reported on August 18, 2026, that AAFCO views the proposal as an important sign of federal recognition, but is concerned the exemption is effectively frozen to a single edition of the Official Publication. The organization said it plans to argue that the exemption should be ongoing and should extend to ingredients reviewed through SRIS, which AAFCO says uses expert review, conflict-of-interest controls, public comment, and a full membership vote. Separately, Venable published an analysis warning that a mandatory federal filing regime could become relevant not just for compliance, but also for retailer requirements, private-label specifications, competitor challenges, and consumer litigation. (petfoodindustry.com)

Why it matters: For veterinarians and other animal health professionals, this is more than an inside-baseball regulatory story. Label modernization was supposed to make pet food labels easier to interpret for pet parents and more clinically useful for comparing products. If adoption slows, practices may keep dealing with a fragmented marketplace where some products move to newer disclosures and others do not, depending on state acceptance and export considerations. At the same time, FDA’s GRAS proposal could reshape how new animal food ingredients move to market, with downstream effects on formulation, innovation timelines, and the evidentiary basis manufacturers use to support safety and marketing claims. FDA’s own guidance makes clear that pet food labeling already sits across both federal and state authorities, so any misalignment between AAFCO’s model system and FDA’s framework can create practical confusion for manufacturers, regulators, and clinicians. (fda.gov)

There’s also a legal and communications angle worth watching. Truth about Pet Food reported that attorney Todd Harrison of Venable presented on what the law allows in pet food label claims, including the risk that evocative package imagery could invite litigation. That matters because clearer rules don’t just affect compliance departments. They shape how companies position products for pet parents, how clinics assess those claims, and how confidently veterinary teams can explain the difference between marketing language and substantiated nutritional information. (truthaboutpetfood.com)

What to watch: The next key signals will be whether AAFCO publishes more formal post-meeting clarification on label modernization timing, whether states publicly map out their adoption schedules, and how AAFCO frames its formal response to FDA before the December 9, 2026, comment deadline. If the agency keeps the exemption tied only to the 2024 Official Publication, the industry may face a more complicated dual-track future for animal food ingredients just as label modernization is already proving harder to implement than expected. (petfoodindustry.com)