Pet foods in the US are regulated on a federal and state level. All pet food manufacturers are required by federal law to register with the FDA. Manufacturers are required to re-register every two years.
All pet food manufacturers are also required to register in each state they sell products in. With states, registration is required each year and in most states there is an annual registration fee along with an annual ‘tonnage’ fee (a fee based on tons of pet food distributed in the state) required. Most states also require pet food manufacturers to submit the labels of each product they sell to be submitted for approval each year.
The challenge for pet food manufacturers is that each state is different in what they require for registration. As example, when a pet food manufacturer sells a pet food in Florida they are required by state law to register and pay a registration fee based on tons of pet food sold within Florida. For small companies selling up to 25 tons the fee is $40.00 annually. For large companies selling more than 5,000 tons of pet food the fee is $3,500.00 annually. The Florida registration expires June 30 each year.
The state of Florida also requires pet food (and animal feed) manufacturers to annually test their products. The required testing is also based on tons of pet food sold in the state. Florida requires a minimum of one sample per year to be tested for protein, fat & fiber (1 sample per 750 tons), another minimum of one sample per year for minerals (1 sample per 15,000 tons), another minimum of one sample per year for aflatoxin (1 sample per 25,000 tons), and one more minimum of one sample per year for vomitoxin (a mycotoxin – 1 sample per 50,000 tons). The unusual thing about this state of Florida requirement is the state allows manufacturers to submit their own samples for testing. By allowing pet food/animal feed manufacturers to submit their own samples, companies can assure the outcome of the required testing (submitting only clean samples).
The state of Indiana requires each pet food manufacturer to obtain an Indiana commercial feed license at a cost of $50.00 annually. This state’s registration expires December 31 each year.
Indiana has an “Inspection fee” of $0.40 per ton (similar to tonnage fee) or with pet foods sold in packages of 10 pounds or less a one time annual inspection fee of $50.00. Pet foods are required to file reports with Indiana (tonnage reports) quarterly – and fee is due at time of report.
Indiana also requires all labels to be submitted for approval. Every pet food brand sold has to submit either a printed copy of their full label or digital copy of their full label (front, back and sides) – and is required to submit a label for each different product sold.
The state of Texas requires registration and an annual license with a fee of $75.00. Texas also charges an “inspection fee” based on tonnage distributed in the state; $0.19 per ton. For products distributed only in containers of five pounds or less – flat rate inspection fee $50.00 annually. Fees are due quarterly.
And Texas requires all pet food labels to be submitted to “review each product label submitted by a licensee to determine compliance with the labeling requirements…”
This same process – registration, fees, tonnage fees, label approvals – is repeated in almost every state…but using different forms, different tonnage fees, and all required to be filed at different times of the year.
And then there are pet foods that are sold only online, not distributed in pet stores in states. To my knowledge, there are no regulations specifically addressing registration requirements or fees for companies that sell only online. It is unknown if all online only brands register in the states they sell (direct to consumer) in.
The fees and the time it takes to register in each state is significant for small brands. Imagine if you are a small pet food or treat company, selling pet food/treats in each state (continental US – 48 states). This brand must register 48 times, pay a license fee 48 times, submit your labels 48 times, and pay tonnage fees 48 times on a quarterly basis.
And consider that each state regulates differently. As example some states allow raw milk pet products, some states do not, and other states require a food dye to be added to raw milk pet products. Some states will allow certain label claims, others do not allow the same claim. In these instances pet food companies must either change their product or their label, or withdraw the product from sale in those challenging states.
What should be simple is not. Instead it is a time consuming and costly expense for manufacturers (which is passed onto consumers) that does not guarantee pet owners are purchasing safe, law-abiding products.
Should a company cheat and not register in all states or not register all of their products? Absolutely not. While we understand the challenge of all these registration requirements, every pet food manufacturer should abide by all state and federal laws.
To make sure your pet food brand is abiding by regulation, any pet owner can contact/email their State Department of Agriculture and ask if the brand they purchase is registered with their state.
Wishing you and your pet(s) the best,
Susan Thixton
Pet Food Safety Advocate
Author Buyer Beware, Co-Author Dinner PAWsible
TruthaboutPetFood.com
Association for Truth in Pet Food
Become a member of our pet food consumer Association. Association for Truth in Pet Food is a a stakeholder organization representing the voice of pet food consumers at AAFCO and with FDA. Your membership helps representatives attend meetings and voice consumer concerns with regulatory authorities. Click Here to learn more.
What’s in Your Pet’s Food?
Is your dog or cat eating risk ingredients? Chinese imports? Petsumer Report tells the ‘rest of the story’ on over 5,000 cat foods, dog foods, and pet treats. 30 Day Satisfaction Guarantee. Click Here to preview Petsumer Report. www.PetsumerReport.com
Find Healthy Pet Foods in Your Area Click Here
The 2023 List
Susan’s List of trusted pet foods. Click Here to learn more.
Sally Arany
February 7, 2023 at 4:02 pm
Per usual, the “laws” are no laws. How depressing.
T Allen
February 7, 2023 at 8:20 pm
Faking lab test results is easily done. Never test any results that don’t come from a legitimate third party lab.
Bobbie Gardner
February 8, 2023 at 1:52 am
Interesting to learn about this process. The repetitive fees across states do not appear to achieve anything that increases safety— it looks like more grifting by government bureaucracies, with the burden borne by businesses and consumers. Perhaps as consumers we need to push our state regulators to focus more on product safety and testing standards that could be accepted across states, instead of every state just trying to take a bite of the huge financial pet food industry pie.
Carol Sacher
February 8, 2023 at 8:03 am
All this nonsense certainly does not insure we are getting SAFE pet food. It is only insuring that the government agencies are getting more of the consumers money through the higher prices WE have to pay.
Pet Foodmaker
February 8, 2023 at 11:08 am
Susan, this is another great post. I agree with you. I even agree (in theory) with your opinion in bold where you call some wonderful pet food companies cheaters because they do not abide absolutely with the broken system of laws.
I am writing this letter under an alias because I represent one of those pet food makers that can’t afford and refuses to play the regulatory game. That does not diminish, however, the healing and healthful power of the food we make.
I am committed to enabling the Forever Dog.
In a quixotic world of absolutes, where (as you suggest) all pet food makers should register all their products in all 50 states, I am a cheater. I occasionally “cheat” state regulations. Let me explain why as the view you presented is limited.
It is not just $75 annually in TX or $40 annually in Florida… It is $75 (or $40 or $100) PER PRODUCT in every state every year.
If a company makes 25 products (various treats, food, chews, toppers) and wants to sell these 25 small batch, human grade products across the US then they would pay approximately $100,000 ANNUALLY in licensing fees for the privilege to TRY. (25 products × $80 average fee × 50 states).
I suspect that the idea of these annual fees originated at an AAFCO meeting between Industry (Mars and Purina mostly) and regulators as a way to squash competition and our collective voice. Who besides the big guys can afford to ante up $100k every year just to TRY to sell their goods. And who but Big Kibble gains from a massive barrier to entry into the pet food industry?
These fees make it cost prohibitive for small, great companies (who prioritize human grade, healthy formulations) to compete. It is a scam that needs to change.
Small manufacturers struggle to make high quality food accessible for consumers. Consider this when you walk into a pet supply store and grab a bag of treats for $10. The store made $5 profit on your purchase; the distributor made $1.50; and the manufacturer grossed $3.50 out of which they had to buy the ingredients, assemble them, package them, pay living wages, rent, utilities, insurance, shipping and more. The manufacturer (hopefully) netted $0.25 out of that $3.50. To come up with $100,000 annually for regulatory licensing they would need to sell 400,000 units just to break even. Good luck. Most people have no experience with how high that bar is for a small, independent manufacturer.
I can also report from first-hand experience that state regulators single out small manufacturers. They try to prevent us from selling unregistered products on our own websites, while they ignore unregistered products from Mars, Purina, Hills and others being sold on Chewy.
The spaghetti soup of state regulations is a real barrier to entry too. Many states differ in their laws and their interpretations, as you said. Some take issue with the minutia of artwork while allowing Big Kibble to put misleading images on their packaging. Some states prohibit us from printing the truth on our packaging about the quality of our ingredients. Some want us to change the name of a product that has as few as two ingredients.
These things obfuscate the truth, confuse the consumer, and create a hurdle that does not exist in the world of human food. From a regulatory perspective, it is easier and cheaper to manufacture and sell human infant formula than human grade pet food. Yet what do the consumers get for all these regulations but confused and duped.
Call me a cheater. I will accept that truth. Because to play by the rules takes money that I could put into human grade, ethically sourced ingredients; protein rich diets; organic and non-GMO produce; whole foods instead of cheap synthetic supplements; living wages for a diverse workforce; green energy; recyclable packing; and charitable donations, and instead it gives that money to a Machine that hamstrings my business and your efforts.
Consumers are only aware of the problems with PET FEED because of the rising voices and choices of people like you and me. So let’s remember that the more we fuel this regulatory Machine (whose job it is to *support* the economic growth of agricultural companies like Mars, Purina, Monsanto/Bayer, Cargill, Hills, etc., – as you’ve reported) the harder Truth and reform become.
There are many examples of the effectiveness of silent, peaceful, economic or participatory protest in history. These protests work because they speak an economic language, and because civil disobedience (“cheating” the game) can mean doing the right thing instead.
I would love to see a world where AAFCO and federal and state regulators govern pet feed and where pet food is governed just like human food.
Keep up the fight Susan. I am in your corner. Your work saves the lives of our beloved companions. I hope you will share this broader view from “the other side of the coin” with your readers.
Regards,
Pet Foodmaker
P.S. I am sharing this letter with Dr. Cathy Alinovi. As the founder of NGPFMA and someone we both respect, I would be interested in her insights as well.
Susan Thixton
February 8, 2023 at 11:15 am
I can’t thank you enough for your comment. We all need to hear this side of it – which far too often we don’t. Thank you.