FSANZ and the AFGC have weighed in behind the consumer regulator’s inquiries into the ABC’s food fraud investigation, as Simplot-owned Leggo’s rejects the findings.
The Australian Competition and Consumer Commission (ACCC) initiated inquiries into claims raised by the ABC Four Corners investigation Duped: Food Exposed.
Last month, forensic traceability company, Source Certain, ran trace element and stable isotope ratio analysis on more than 900 samples drawn from 221 tomato products across 39 brands for the program. Twenty-two per cent of samples did not match the claimed country of origin and a further six per cent were flagged for additional testing.
Source Certain told the program it held more than 98 per cent certainty the failed samples originated in China. Leggo’s, Coles and Aldi tomato paste products were named. All three rejected the results.
Food Standards Australia New Zealand (FSANZ) and the Australian Food and Grocery Council (AFGC) have both issued statements this week, and Leggo’s escalated its response with a full-screen rejection posted to its Instagram account.
Two regulators, one label
The Country of Origin Food Labelling Information Standard 2016 requires most foods offered for retail sale in Australia to carry information on where the food was grown, produced or made. It sits under the Australian Consumer Law and is enforced by the ACCC alongside state and territory consumer protection regulators, not by food safety regulators.
ACCC Commissioner, Luke Woodward, said, “It is important that consumers can be confident that any claims made on food labelling, packaging and in advertisements are truthful, accurate and not misleading.
“We know that consumers may be guided by non-price factors, including claims about the country of origin or supply chain, when choosing which food products to buy.”
The ACCC statement does not name individual companies but refers to the claims raised in the program.
FSANZ made the regulatory split explicit in its own statement, noting it sets food standards for Australia and New Zealand which are enforced by national, state and territory food regulators, while country of origin labelling law sits with the ACCC. Its standards are directed at the safety and suitability of food, including nutrition and ingredient information on packaged product.
FSANZ CEO, Dr Sandra Cuthbert, said, “It is good to see the issues and alleged industry practices raised by Four Corners are being taken seriously by regulators.”
Cuthbert said consumer confidence in the claims made by food producers and manufacturers was vital to maintaining trust in Australian food both domestically and in export markets, and that FSANZ would continue working with regulators, industry and consumer representatives to support a transparent food system.
Assistant Minister for Productivity, Competition, Charities and Treasury, Andrew Leigh, welcomed the inquiries, saying honest businesses should be rewarded for competing on quality and integrity rather than undercut by false or misleading claims.
AFGC defends the system
The AFGC statement doesn’t address the specific allegations but points to Australia’s food safety system and the shared responsibility between businesses, federal, state and territory regulators.
The council said manufacturers invest heavily in supplier verification, traceability, quality assurance, testing and auditing, and that those systems run across complex domestic and international supply chains and are built to catch risks before product reaches consumers.
AFGC CEO, Colm Maguire, said the sector relies on high-quality agricultural produce and is proud of its commitment to Australian-grown inputs, with rural and regional communities hosting farms and factories benefiting from the local economic activity.
“The global supply chains underpinning the range of products on supermarket shelves are not only complex, but fragile as we continue to observe,” Maguire said.
“Australian food, beverage and grocery manufacturers are unwavering in their commitment to local supply chains, quality products and sovereign capability.”
Leggo’s goes public
Leggo’s posted a statement to its Instagram account saying it categorically rejects the claims made in the program regarding the origin of tomatoes used in certain Leggo’s products, and that it takes the claims extremely seriously given its commitment to Australian farmers and regional communities.
The brand said it had reviewed the allegations, verified the batch codes provided and confirmed through its records that the tomatoes used in those products were grown in Australia. It said it stands by the integrity and traceability of its sourcing practices.
Owner Simplot Australia has said its verification traced the relevant batch codes through manufacturing records, ingredient inputs and supplier verification records to the Australian paddocks where the tomatoes were grown, and that it has engaged directly with its supplier.
“Our records confirm the tomatoes used in those products were grown in Australia,” the company said.
Simplot has also challenged the testing methodology used and its lack of transparency. Leggo’s tomato paste and sauces are processed at Simplot’s Echuca plant in northern Victoria, which employs about 150 people.
Coles declined an interview with the program and rejected the results, and has committed to commissioning independent testing. Aldi said it partners with reputable suppliers who have given assurances on origin. All three companies have said they will review their supply chains.
Growers push on labelling reform
AUSVEG has said the claims expose wider failings in country of origin labelling and in the testing of imported vegetable products. AUSVEG CEO, Michael Coote, said current labelling may tell a consumer where an imported canned or frozen product was packed or manufactured, but often not where the produce was actually grown.
NFF Horticulture Council Executive Officer, Richard Shannon, said retailers had an opportunity to give confidence to consumers and to their Australian suppliers that products on shelf are what they claim to be. He noted that if a broadcaster could commission testing, it was reasonable to expect retailers could ask the same questions of their own supply chains.
What it means for manufacturers
The dispute turns on evidentiary method. Simplot’s position rests on documentary traceability, being batch codes, supplier records and manufacturing inputs. The program’s position rests on analytical testing of the finished product. Neither approach is mandated for country of origin substantiation under the Information Standard, and there is no routine analytical testing regime for imported processed vegetable products at the border.
The regulatory split matters commercially. Food safety compliance and origin claim compliance are separate obligations enforced by separate agencies, so a manufacturer can hold a clean food safety record and still carry consumer law exposure on a label claim it has verified only on paper.
That gap is where the cost sits. Manufacturers relying on supplier declarations alone carry the liability for a claim they have not independently verified, and the cost of forensic verification lands with them if regulators or retailers start requiring it. Coles commissioning independent testing signals which way that cost is likely to flow through the supply chain.
The allegations follow the BBC’s 2024 findings of Chinese tomatoes in products marketed as Italian, and the Anti-Dumping Commission’s finding last year that Italian producers had dumped tomato products in the Australian market.
