Industry experts, consumers and politicians share their views with The Connexion on whether plant-based products should continue to use meat-related names, after the EU failed to reach final agreement on rules governing their use.
EU lawmakers have failed to reach final agreement on whether vegetarian and plant-based products should be allowed to use meat-related terms such as “veggie burger”, “plant-based sausage” or “vegetable steak”. It means any change in the law is postponed until at least 2026.
The deadlock follows an October vote in the European Parliament backing restrictions on meat-related names for foods that contain no meat.
However, member states and EU institutions have since been unable to agree on how - or whether - the proposal should be implemented.
Supporters of the restrictions, including French MEP Céline Imart, argue that using meat-related terms for plant-based products creates confusion and undermines livestock farmers.
Several EU countries, notably Germany - Europe’s largest market for vegetarian products - oppose any change, warning that forcing companies to rename products could disrupt the single market and confuse consumers.
With no compromise reached during talks in Brussels this week, the future of plant-based food labelling in the EU remains uncertain.
The Connexion spoke to a range of industry, consumer and advocacy groups across Europe to gather reactions.
European Vegetarian Union (EVU)
Rafael Pinto, senior policy manager at the European Vegetarian Union, said the failure to reach agreement highlighted the legal and political complexity of the issue.
“The repercussions and unintended consequences for consumers, farmers, small businesses and the entire food chain were not taken into account,” he said, pointing to the difficulty of translating and enforcing new terminology consistently across all EU languages.
He welcomed the postponement of the vote and called for a full impact assessment. “More than 600 organisations have urged EU institutions to drop this proposal, together with 300,000 citizens who signed a public petition,” he said.
On consumer understanding Pinto said there was no evidence of widespread confusion. “Current legislation is sufficient to protect consumers, as confirmed by the European Court of Justice. Consumer organisations also agree these names are not an issue.”
He also questioned claims that the ban would support farmers. “We have not seen any data showing how this would benefit farmers, particularly small ones, who already receive very little public support,” he said.
Céline Imart, French MEP
Ms Imart (Les Républicains), who represents the Tarn and supports livestock farmers, has been one of the most prominent advocates of restricting meat-related terms during debates in the European Parliament.
“A sausage is a sausage, not a plant product,” she said, arguing that the change is needed to protect consumers from confusion and to recognise farmers’ work.
She has said the proposal is not intended to stigmatise plant-based alternatives, but to maintain clarity and trust in the food system - a position criticised by vegetarian and environmental groups, who argue most consumers already understand such labels.
Interbev
Interbev, France’s interprofessional livestock and meat association, welcomed the European Parliament’s October vote.
“This was an encouraging first step towards a clear and harmonised protection of meat-related names in Europe,” said press relations manager Enza Leblanc.
She stressed that the sector does not oppose plant-based products themselves. “However, we reject the use of meat names for marketing purposes,” she said, arguing that imitation products can give the impression they offer the same nutritional guarantees as meat.
Ms Leblanc also highlighted nutritional differences, saying meat is a natural source of protein, iron and vitamin B12, while plant-based substitutes often rely on additives to mimic taste and texture. She called for a binding EU framework reserving meat names for products that actually contain meat.
BEUC
The European consumer organisation BEUC warned that banning meat-related terms could be counterproductive.
“Our data shows that almost 70% of consumers understand and accept these names when products are clearly labelled vegetarian or vegan,” said food policy officer Irina Popescu.
She said familiar terms help consumers integrate plant-based foods into meals and warned that EU-wide restrictions could add regulatory hurdles and increase costs without delivering clear consumer benefits.
Eurogroup for Animals
Eurogroup for Animals said the proposal runs counter to EU goals of simplifying legislation and supporting innovation in sustainable food systems.
“It creates unnecessary barriers for a rapidly growing sector offering more ethical and sustainable choices,” said Ines Ajuda, the organisation’s farm animals programme leader. She warned producers could face costly packaging and marketing changes with little public benefit.
European Livestock Voice
European Livestock Voice welcomed the Parliament’s October vote, arguing that protecting meat-related names is important for consumers and farmers alike.
“Names like ‘steak’ and ‘sausage’ reflect composition, culinary expertise and hygiene standards,” the organisation said, adding that targeted restrictions would clarify the market while still allowing plant-based products to grow under names that reflect their true nature.
ProVeg International
ProVeg International described the proposal as unnecessary and welcomed the postponement of the vote.
“We are relieved the vote did not take place this week, giving EU institutions more time to reflect on whether restricting plant-based food labelling is truly needed,” said global CEO Jasmijn de Boo.
She pointed to survey data suggesting consumers are not confused by plant-based labels and warned that forcing companies to rebrand could lead to high costs and lost customers. She also argued that the growing plant-based sector presents new opportunities for European farmers, particularly in pulse and legume production.
