The US Food and Drug Administration has acknowledged that developing a federal definition of ultra-processed foods is proving more complicated than anticipated, as regulators seek criteria that can be applied consistently across the country’s diverse food supply.

Donald A. Prater, the FDA’s acting deputy commissioner for food, said the initiative remained a priority during a keynote discussion at the IFT FIRST conference in Chicago on July 14.

“Just because it’s a tough challenge, and it’s multifaceted, doesn’t mean it’s something we should shy away from,” Prater said.

The FDA and the US Department of Agriculture began the process in July 2025, when they issued a joint request for information intended to support the development of a federally recognized, uniform definition of ultra-processed foods.

The consultation highlighted the breadth of the task. Regulators asked whether classification should take account of particular ingredients, chemical and physical processing methods, nutritional composition, energy density, palatability and other product characteristics. They also sought input on how any resulting criteria could be systematically measured and applied to foods sold in the US.

There is currently no universally accepted definition of an ultra-processed food. Existing classification systems can also place products with substantially different nutritional profiles in the same category. Under the widely used NOVA system, for example, products including some whole-grain breads and sweetened yogurts may be categorized as ultra-processed.

The FDA’s Human Foods Program has confirmed that work on the definition will continue during 2026. The agency said it was gathering research and other information and analysing submissions received through the 2025 consultation in cooperation with the USDA and other federal partners.

Although a uniform definition could eventually provide a common basis for nutrition research and government policy, Prater said the FDA was not planning to ban foods classified as ultra-processed.

The agency is separately developing a front-of-pack nutrition labelling programme intended to help consumers identify nutritional information more quickly. However, the FDA has not said that the proposed labelling system will be based on the future ultra-processed food definition.

For food manufacturers, the regulatory uncertainty is developing alongside growing consumer concern about processing and ingredient formulation.

Hartman Group’s Claims & Cues 2026 report found that 91% of surveyed US consumers said they tried to limit their consumption of ultra-processed foods. The research also found that 41% considered “simple ingredients” a very important product claim, while 33% said unfamiliar ingredient names helped them decide whether a product was ultra-processed.

The findings came from an online survey of 3,050 US adults conducted between January 29 and February 27, 2026, supplemented by digital ethnographies and follow-up interviews.

The results suggest that consumers are already using ingredient lists and on-pack signals to make judgements about processing, despite the absence of an agreed regulatory classification. This places pressure on manufacturers to communicate the purpose of ingredients and processing methods clearly, while avoiding claims that cannot be substantiated.

A federal definition could ultimately bring greater consistency, but the FDA’s comments indicate that the agency has yet to resolve how processing, formulation and nutritional quality should be balanced within a single workable system.