Draft Food Regulation 2025: Changes by industry

Change: A new $500 fee to issue a certificate of clearance to lift a prohibition order.

Why it’s proposed: The proposed fee will assist enforcement agencies to recover costs in issuing and enforcing prohibition orders.

Prohibition orders prevent a business from operating. They are issued when a business has failed to comply with an improvement notice, or a serious food safety issue has been identified. Prohibition orders can only be lifted after an inspection confirms the issue or issues have been rectified. Then, a certificate of clearance must be issued.

What it will mean for businesses: It creates a fairer system. Non-compliant businesses will bear the additional costs associated with enforcement efforts. 

Change: Updating the baseline for licence fees, inspection and audit fees for licensed businesses (section 48 of the draft Regulation), and inspection fees for non-licensed businesses (section 186 of the draft Regulation) to reflect annual Consumer Price Index (CPI) increases.  

Why it’s proposed: These fee baselines were last updated in 2015. It is proposed CPI be applied each year over the period 2015–2024.  

What it will mean for businesses: As the current Regulation allows these fees to increase annually by CPI anyway, the actual impact on food businesses is relatively small. For example, inspection and audit fees will increase from $362 per hour to $370 per hour.  

Change and why it’s proposed: Administration fees, and the improvement notice fee, are proposed to increase by the cumulative CPI since their last respective update.  

• The annual administration charge for non-licensed businesses (section 187) was last updated in 2010. CPI has been applied over the period 2010–2024, increasing the maximum charge for a premises with up to 5 full-time equivalent food handlers from $390 to $570. The fee and the increase will depend on the size of the business.
• The licence application fee (section 33) was last updated in 2004. CPI has been applied for the period 2004–2024, increasing the fee from $50 to $85.
• The fee to apply for a change to the register of offences (section 184) was last updated in 2004. CPI has been applied for the period 2004–2024, increasing the fee from $55 to $95.  
• The improvement notice fee (section 180) was last updated in 2004. CPI has been applied for the period 2004–2024, increasing the fee from $330 to $565. 

For more detail on this change, see Table 5 and Appendix B of the Regulatory Impact Statement (PDF, 950 KB). 

Change and why it’s proposed: All penalty notice amounts are proposed to increase by the cumulative CPI over the period 2010–2024, then rounded to the nearest penalty unit.

Some examples are:

• The penalty notice amount for contravening a prohibition order (section 64 of the Act) is increased by CPI from $770 to $1,100 for an individual, and from $1,540 to $2,200 for a corporation.
• The penalty notice amount for failing to display a copy of the licence on the relevant licensed premises (section 44(1) of the draft Regulation) is increased by CPI from $330 to $440.
• The penalty notice amount for selling cracked eggs to a person or business who is not licensed to receive cracked eggs (section 167(1) of the draft Regulation) is increased by CPI from $660 to $990.

Penalty notice amounts were last updated in 2010. The full list is in Schedule 2 of the draft Regulation.

The penalty notice amount for corporations who do not comply with the Food Standards Code (as outlined in section 21 of the NSW Food Act 2003) is proposed to increase by more than CPI to triple the value of the individual penalty notice. Resetting the penalty for corporations at a higher level is proposed to deter them from committing food safety offences. This means the penalty notice amount for failing to comply with the Food Standards Code would increase from $440 to $660 for an individual, and from $880 to $1,980 for a corporation.

Some other penalty notice amounts are also proposed to increase by more than CPI to align with similar offences in other food safety schemes.  

For more detail on this change, see Table 5 of the Regulatory Impact Statement (PDF, 950 KB).   

Change: Modernising definitions and business types related to dairy transport.  

The vehicle vendor definition, and all references to vehicle vendor, have been deleted as it is no longer current. Some business types will also be deleted.  

Processed dairy products will fall under the definition of a processed dairy product, and most transport of these products will be a processed dairy product transport business.  

Why it’s proposed: The business types related to dairy transport will be simpler to understand. There will be no impact to businesses.

For more detail on this change, see Table 5 and Appendix B of the Regulatory Impact Statement (PDF, 950 KB).  

Change: Clarifying that transport businesses must take milk samples at the time of collecting milk from a dairy farm.

Why it’s proposed: To clarify the sampling responsibilities of businesses that collect milk from dairy farms. 

Change: Make the food safety measures outlined in the Biosecurity (Salmonella Enteritidis) Control Order 2024 permanent requirements for licensed egg producers (producing more than 240 eggs per week).

Why it’s proposed: SE is an ongoing food safety risk to the egg industry. This amendment transitions food safety management measures from the Control Order into the Food Regulation as ongoing requirements for licensed egg producers to minimise the risk of SE contamination of eggs.

What it will mean for businesses: Licensed egg primary production businesses producing more than 240 eggs per week will need to continue to apply the specified food safety management measures in the Control Order to control the risk of SE. For the full requirements, see Schedule 8 of the draft Regulation (PDF, 807KB).

Benefit to consumers: Salmonellosis is estimated to cost Australians around $140 million each year through premature death, lost productivity, direct medical costs and pain and suffering. Eggs are a common vehicle for transmission of SE to humans, particularly consumption of raw or undercooked egg in products such as mayonnaise, desserts and sauces. Improvements in the way eggs are handled throughout the supply chain has the potential to reduce this significant cost for consumers.  

Change: Make SE testing as required under the Biosecurity (Salmonella Enteritidis) Control Order 2024 a permanent measure for licensed egg producers (producing more than 240 eggs per week) to enable faster detection and reduce foodborne illness.  

Why it’s proposed: SE is a notifiable disease of poultry in all Australian jurisdictions, meaning there is a legal obligation to notify the NSW Department of Primary Industries and Regional Development if you know or suspect that poultry are infected.  

Licensed egg farms are already required to take samples from their egg production sheds to test for SE under the Biosecurity (Salmonella Enteritidis) Control Order 2024. SE is an ongoing risk, so permanent testing is proposed.

What it will mean for businesses: For egg producers operating within the National Salmonella Enteritidis Monitoring and Accreditation Program (NSEMAP), there will be no additional costs.

For those not part of the NSEMAP, regular permanent SE testing is estimated to cost an egg farm approximately $540 per year.

Regular SE testing will ensure faster detection of SE and earlier recall of affected eggs. This will reduce the risk that SE is detected on a farm through human sickness.

Benefit to consumers: Salmonellosis is estimated to cost Australians around $140 million each year through premature death, lost productivity, direct medical costs and pain and suffering. Eggs are a common vehicle for transmission of SE to humans, particularly consumption of raw or undercooked egg in products such as mayonnaise, desserts and sauces. Improvements in the way eggs are handled throughout the supply chain has the potential to reduce this significant cost for consumers.  

Change: Licensed egg businesses must keep records for 2 years relating to sales, purchases, transport and storage of cracked eggs, unpasteurised egg products and unpasteurised blended egg product mixtures.  

Why it’s proposed: To clarify the required time period. Egg business licence holders under the current Regulation have been required to keep these records, but the length of time for records to be kept was not clear.   

Change: Refer to the Handbook of Australian Sheepmeat Processing: The AUS-MEAT Language for the definitions of ‘lamb’ and ‘hogget’.

Why it’s proposed: As industry definitions of lamb and hogget change periodically, this amendment avoids ongoing updates to the definitions in the Regulation.

What it will mean for businesses: The definitions in the Regulation will always be the same as industry-agreed definitions of these terms, avoiding potential confusion and complexity for businesses.   

Change: Clarify that all abattoirs and meat processing plants will be required to comply with the relevant Australian Standards when slaughtering and processing, irrespective of their licence status.

Why it’s proposed: It is already an offence to operate an abattoir or meat processing plant without a licence, this change creates an additional offence and penalty for illegal meat businesses. The additional penalties payable by offenders will help offset the substantial investigation costs.

What it will mean for businesses: The change will benefit industry overall as the Food Authority can more effectively take enforcement action on illegal businesses, which risk industry reputation and under-cut legal businesses.

How it will benefit consumers: Additional prosecution options for illegal businesses will make it more difficult for these businesses to operate illegally, with a potential reduction in foodborne illness from illegal meat.   

Change: Aligning the Regulation with updates to the Australian Standard AS4696 Hygienic production and transportation of meat and meat products for human consumption (AS4696).

Why it’s proposed: AS4696 was updated in 2023 with 14 amendments related to post-mortem inspection (PMI) of carcases and carcase disposition of cattle, sheep, goats, and pigs. The AS4696 amendments remove procedures that are no longer necessary or apply alternate risk management procedures. For example, a regulated full post-mortem inspection to detect Cysticercus Bovis infection is no longer required. Instead, a risk-based framework determines high versus low-risk animals.  

What it means for businesses: The updated AS4696:2023 reduces regulation and benefits industry. There are expected labour savings and increased returns as more pieces of the carcase are saleable for higher returns.  

Benefit to consumers: Reduced handling of carcases leads to a lower risk of cross-contamination and potential consumer illness.  

Change: Berry businesses in NSW will require a licence with the Food Authority under the plant products food safety scheme upon implementation of the Food Regulation 2025. 

Why it’s proposed: This change enacts a new national primary production and processing standard for berries, introduced into the Australia New Zealand Food Standards Code from 12 February 2025. The standard aims to strengthen food safety management on-farm and during initial processing to reduce food safety risks along the supply chain from farm to fork.

What it will mean for businesses: All berry businesses in NSW must be licensed with the Food Authority. Annual licence costs will depend on the size of the property:  

• $75 for small berry producers, with a property size less than 10 hectares  
• $300 for larger berry businesses with a property size greater than 10 hectares.    

Additional licensing fees include:

• a one-off licence application fee of $85
• an inspection fee of $370 per hour for an authorised officer to inspect the premises to determine compliance.  Frequency of inspections will depend on business risk.

To comply with the new national standard, berry businesses are also likely to have increased production costs, which will depend on the facilities and systems of each individual business. Some businesses may have systems that are sufficient, while others may need to improve or make a significant investment to ensure compliance. They will need to ensure their premises, equipment and vehicles are suitable, ensure inputs and waste disposal are suitable and ensure staff have sufficient skills and knowledge and understand their health and hygiene requirements.

The proposed change will benefit businesses through reduced risk, improved capacity, safeguarding the business’s reputation and potential business management benefits, such as better record keeping.

There are also broader industry benefits through improved capacity to manage a food safety incident and avoided reputational damage associated with recalls.

The Food Authority is working with industry Global Food Safety Initiative (GFSI) food safety scheme owners Freshcare, SQF, GLOBALG.A.P. and BRCGS to recognise industry audits. This will result in a cost saving for businesses with a good compliance history and allow government resources to be focused on:

• higher risk businesses, such as those who are not part of an industry food safety scheme so do not receive industry audits
• higher risk activities, such as washing of produce
• businesses identified through industry audits with a poor compliance history.

Benefit to consumers: Stronger food safety management on-farm and during initial processing assists to reduce food safety risks along the supply chain, resulting in safer food for consumers.

For more detail on this change, see Table 5 the Regulatory Impact Statement (PDF, 950 KB).   

Change: All leafy vegetable businesses in NSW will require a licence with the Food Authority under the plant products food safety scheme upon implementation of the Food Regulation 2025. Larger leafy vegetable producers will also need to develop and operate according to a Food Safety Program.

Why it’s proposed: This change enacts a new national primary production and processing standard for leafy vegetables, introduced into the Australia New Zealand Food Standards Code from 12 February 2025. The standard aims to strengthen food safety management on-farm and during initial processing to reduce food safety risks along the supply chain from farm to fork.

What it means for businesses: All leafy vegetable businesses in NSW must be licensed with the Food Authority.

Annual licence costs will depend on the size of the property and business:

• $75 for small leafy vegetable producers with a property size less than 10 hectares
• for larger producers with property size greater than 10 hectares, the annual licence cost depends on the number of full-time equivalent (FTE) workers handling food (leafy vegetables):
  • $570 for up to 5 FTE
  • $1,180 for greater than 5 but less than 50 FTE  
  • $5,170 for greater than 50 FTE.

Additional licensing fees include:

• a one-off $85 licence application fee
• an inspection fee of $370 per hour for an authorised officer to inspect the premises to determine compliance. Frequency of inspections will depend on business risk.      

To comply with the new national standard, leafy vegetable businesses are also likely to have increased production costs, which will depend on the facilities and systems of each individual business. Some businesses may have systems that are sufficient, while others may need to improve or make a significant investment to ensure compliance. They will need to ensure their premises, equipment and vehicles are suitable, ensure inputs and waste disposal are suitable and ensure staff have sufficient skills and knowledge and understand their health and hygiene requirements.

Larger leafy vegetable producers, with a property size greater than 10 hectares, will also need to develop and operate according to a Food Safety Program, which outlines how food safety risks in the business will be controlled.

The proposed change will benefit businesses through reduced risk, improved capacity, safeguarding the business’s reputation and potential business management benefits, such as better record keeping.

There are also broader industry benefits through improved capacity to manage a food safety incident and avoided reputational damage associated with recalls.

The Food Authority is working with industry Global Food Safety Initiative (GFSI) food safety scheme owners Freshcare, SQF, GLOBALG.A.P. and BRCGS to recognise industry audits. This will result in a cost saving for scheme-certified businesses with a good compliance history and allow government resources to be focused on:

• higher risk businesses, such as those who are not part of an industry food safety scheme so do not receive industry audits
• higher risk activities, such as washing of produce
• businesses identified through industry audits with a poor compliance history.

Benefit to consumers: Stronger food safety management on-farm and during initial processing assists to reduce food safety risks along the supply chain, resulting in safer food for consumers.  

For more detail on this change, see Table 5 of the Regulatory Impact Statement (PDF, 950 KB).  

Change: All melon businesses in NSW will require a licence with the Food Authority under the plant products food safety scheme upon implementation of the Food Regulation 2025. Larger melon producers will also need to develop and operate according to a Food Safety Program.

Why it’s proposed: This change enacts a new national primary production and processing standard for melons, introduced into the Australia New Zealand Food Standards Code from 12 February 2025. The standard aims to strengthen food safety management on-farm and during initial processing to reduce food safety risks along the supply chain from farm to fork.

What it means for businesses: All melon businesses in NSW must be licensed with the Food Authority.

Annual licence costs will depend on the size of the property and business:

• $75 for small melon producers with a property size less than 10 hectares
• for larger producers with property size greater than 10 hectares, the annual licence cost depends on the number of full-time equivalent (FTE) workers handling food (melons):
  • $570 for up to 5 FTE
  • $1,180 for greater than 5 but less than 50 FTE  
  • $5,170 for greater than 50 FTE.

Additional licensing fees include:

• a one-off $85 licence application fee
• an inspection fee of $370 per hour for an authorised officer to inspect the premises to determine compliance. Frequency of inspections will depend on business risk.   

To comply with the new national standard, melon businesses are also likely to have increased production costs, which will depend on the facilities and systems of each individual business. Some businesses may have systems that are sufficient, while others may need to improve or make a significant investment to ensure compliance. They will need to ensure their premises, equipment and vehicles are suitable, ensure inputs and waste disposal are suitable and ensure staff have sufficient skills and knowledge and understand their health and hygiene requirements.

Larger melon producers, with a property size greater than 10 hectares, will also need to develop and operate according to a Food Safety Program, which outlines how food safety risks in the business will be controlled.

The proposed change benefits businesses through reduced risk, improved capacity, safeguarding the business’s reputation and potential business management benefits, such as better record keeping.

There are also broader industry benefits through improved capacity to manage a food safety incident and avoided reputational damage associated with recalls.

The Food Authority is working with industry Global Food Safety Initiative (GFSI) food safety scheme owners Freshcare, SQF, GLOBALG.A.P and BRCGS to recognise industry audits. This will result in a cost saving for scheme-certified businesses with a good compliance history and allow government verification resources to be focused on:

• higher risk businesses, such as those who are not part of an industry food safety scheme so do not receive industry audits
• higher risk activities, such as washing of produce
• businesses identified through industry audits with a poor compliance history.

Benefit to consumers: Stronger food safety management on-farm and during initial processing assists to reduce food safety risks along the supply chain, resulting in safer food for consumers.  

For more detail on this change, see Table 5 of the Regulatory Impact Statement (PDF, 950 KB).   

Change: A requirement for samples to be analysed of post-harvest wash water of leafy vegetables and melons.  

Why it’s proposed: Each food safety scheme has sampling and microbiological analysis requirements. These are detailed in the Food Safety Schemes Manual.

Industry best practice is to conduct regular microbiological testing of post-harvest wash water as it is a critical control point for food safety. Wash water must contain a sanitiser to reduce microbial load on fruit or vegetable surfaces and remove soil, debris, and chemical residues. Sampling and analysis of this step is an additional way to assess pathogen management.

The relevant pathogens and testing frequency will be determined with further industry consultation.

What it will mean for businesses: The cost of sampling and microbiological analysis will depend on the frequency of testing, which pathogens are being tested and which laboratory is used.

Producers certified to an industry Global Food Safety Initiative (GFSI) scheme are already required to sample used wash water once per year as part of their certification process.  

Benefit to consumers: Monitoring allows any issues with sanitiser concentrations or wash water quality to be detected, reducing risks of foodborne illness.

For more detail on this change, see Table 5 of the Regulatory Impact Statement (PDF, 950 KB). 

Change: Establish a plant products industry consultative committee for consultation with the plant products industry.

Why it’s proposed: All licensed food categories have an associated industry consultative committee to provide an ongoing consultation forum between industry and government.

What it will mean for businesses: Improved engagement with the Food Authority and distribution of information on prospective policy changes and consultation opportunities.

Change: Clarification that wet storage is an activity that makes a business a seafood business, and that high pressure processing is also captured by the seafood safety scheme in the Regulation.

Why it’s proposed: This change (sections 122 and 124) clarifies that wet storage and high pressure processing are captured by the seafood safety scheme. Wet storage has been in use by the shellfish industry for many years. High pressure processing is a relatively new method of processing seafood.  

Change: Clarify that vehicle licence labels (section 43) must be displayed to be readable from the outside of the vehicle, whenever the vehicle is in operation for the food business authorised by the licence, and until the licensing label expires.

Why it’s proposed: To provide clarity to food businesses about vehicle licence label placement.  

Change: Shorten the notification timeframe for samples that fail microbiological limits during routine testing. The change proposes that a business must notify the Food Authority verbally as soon as practicable within 24 hours, and in writing within 48 hours, after the licence holder becomes aware of the results.

The current requirement is verbal notification within 24 hours, and in writing within 7 days.

Why it’s proposed: Faster notification allows the Food Authority to help the food business sooner and determine necessary actions to avoid unsafe food being sold.  

What it will mean for businesses: Helping businesses sooner potentially reduces recall costs and reputational damage to both the business and suppliers.

Benefit to consumers: Decisions about food recalls, as well as cleaning and sanitising, can be made sooner, resulting in less unsafe food being sold and a reduction in cases of foodborne illness.   

Change: Laboratories will be required to notify the Food Authority in writing within 24 hours after they become aware a sample of food has failed microbiological limits. A new penalty (maximum 25 penalty units) is also proposed for the person in charge of a laboratory for a failure to report a sample of food that has failed the microbiological limits. The penalty notice amount proposed for this offence is $990.

Why it’s proposed: Many food businesses have samples analysed due to supplier requirements, in addition to samples required as part of their food licence. Extending test-failure notification requirements to laboratories provides greater oversight of food samples that fail microbiological limits in the Food Safety Schemes Manual. This will allow the Food Authority to work faster and more proactively with food businesses.

What it will mean for businesses: Helping businesses sooner potentially reduces recall costs and reputational damage to both the business and suppliers.

Benefit to consumers: Decisions about food recalls, as well as cleaning and sanitising, can be made sooner, resulting in less unsafe food sold and a reduction in the number of people impacted by foodborne illness.   

Change: Students will be required to complete the entire NSW Food Safety Supervisor (FSS) course with one approved training organisation (RTO).

Why it’s proposed: This ensures students completing the NSW FSS course have not missed any key focus areas, as training organisations not approved by the Food Authority do not teach or assess this material.  

What it will mean for RTOs and students: For approved RTOs, this change reduces administrative burden.

For students, they will be required to complete the entire NSW FSS course with one approved RTO. Some students who completed one unit of competency through a different qualification, and later want to obtain the NSW Food Safety Supervisor qualification, will be required to re-do the unit so the whole course is completed with one approved RTO.  

Benefit to consumers: All NSW Food Safety Supervisors will be trained by Food Authority approved RTOs in key focus areas relating to common causes of foodborne illness outbreaks and allergy management.

Change: Approved RTOs must issue a NSW Food Safety Supervisor certificate within 10 days of a student completing their training and assessment; however, RTOs may apply for an extension in special circumstances. It is proposed to limit the allowable extension period between a student completing their training and assessment, and an RTO issuing the certificate, to a maximum of 6 months. After this time, students will be required to complete the training and assessment again.

Why it’s proposed: The change will ensure students receive their NSW FSS certificate promptly after completing training and assessment.  

What it will mean for RTOs and students: For most RTOs and students there will be no change, as approved RTOs must issue the certificate within 10 days of the training and assessment being completed.  

For students enrolled in a longer qualification, such as a Certificate III in Hospitality, this continues to ensure students receive their NSW FSS certificate when the relevant training and assessment in the required units of competency is completed, allowing them to begin working as a Food Safety Supervisor straight away.