The current Congressional session has seen the introduction of bipartisan legislation that, if enacted, would dramatically change the regulatory landscape for pet food and animal feed products. The reintroduced Pet Food Uniform Regulatory Reform Act (PURR Act) would make sweeping changes to the regulatory framework for dog and cat food ingredients and claims in which the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the states currently share jurisdiction. The newly introduced Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2026 would extend many of the requirements of the PURR Act to all animal food and feed. The reintroduced Innovative Feed Enhancement and Economic Development Act (Innovative FEED Act) proposes to create a new regulatory framework for “zootechnical animal food substances” under which such substances would be regulated by FDA as food additives rather than as animal drugs. While many key stakeholders have expressed support for the PURR Act, state regulators continue to oppose the legislation and have recently introduced resolutions designed to support ongoing state regulation. Many stakeholders including FDA appear to support the Innovative FEED Act, and the agency has said that it intends to develop policies to facilitate the marketing of zootechnical animal food substances in the event the legislation does not pass. This alert provides a concise summary of these key initiatives as well as ways in which stakeholders can further engage on the issues.
PURR Act of 2025
On January 21, 2025, the PURR Act of 2025 (H.R. 597), was introduced in the United States House of Representatives by a bipartisan group of five members and referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce (which has oversight over FDA), where it currently awaits further action.
The bill is a reintroduced version of the PURR Act of 2024, which was never brought to a vote during the previous session of Congress. In comparison with the 2024 version, the PURR Act of 2025 includes a number of editorial changes and a new provision clarifying that the bill’s preemption provision shall not be construed to restrict state food safety oversight activities, “including any such activities relating to implementation of the FDA Food Safety Modernization Act, outbreak investigations, surveillance sampling, or investigations of consumer complaints.” Otherwise, the PURR Act of 2025 is identical to the 2024 version.
As we’ve previously reported, the PURR Act defines “pet food” to include only food (including treats, nutritional supplements, and pet food ingredients) intended for consumption by “companion animals,” which the bill defines as “domesticated canine[s] or feline[s],” and thus, the legislation, as currently drafted, would not extend to livestock or other animals including those the Association of Animal Feed Control Officials (AAFCO) Model Bill defines as “specialty pets,” such as hamsters and pet birds. If enacted, the PURR Act would broadly preempt states from directly or indirectly establishing, maintaining, implementing, or enforcing any authority or requirement relating to the labels, labeling, and advertising of pet food. Ingredients that are not the subject of an FDA premarket authorization (e.g., food or color additive approval, GRAS Notification), but are identified in chapter 6 of the 2024 edition of the AAFCO Official Publication (or any subsequent amendments thereto or editions thereof) as acceptable for use in pet food, would be deemed generally recognized as safe (GRAS) unless FDA finds to the contrary. The law also would, among other things, set timelines for FDA review of GRAS Notifications for pet food ingredients, specify that certain claims (e.g., hairball or tartar control, plaque removal, bad breath odor, general urinary tract health support) may be made without FDA premarket approval, and require FDA to issue guidance and regulations on specific pet food topics. See our prior alert for further details regarding these and others provisions of the bill.
Public reaction to the PURR Act of 2025 generally has mirrored reactions in response to the 2024 version. A number of pet food and related industry groups, such as the Pet Food Institute, Pet Food Association of Canada, Pet Industry Distributors Association, and American Pet Products Association, reiterated their support of the bill. The American Feed Industry Association published an issue paper explaining that it would support the bill if it applied to all animal food, including livestock, poultry, and aquaculture feed and specialty pet foods.
AAFCO has continued to express its disappointment with the bill. Shortly after the bill was reintroduced, Austin Therrell, Executive Director of AAFCO, told Petfood Industry News that the “legislation would greatly reduce consumer protection and remove the ability of state level regulators to provide the oversight that U.S. pets and pet owners deserve,” and that AAFCO “will continue to advocate for innovation within the pet food industry in a safe and responsible manner that does not compromise the wellbeing of those the industry serves.” More recently, at its August 2025 annual meeting, AAFCO passed two resolutions aimed at facilitating state regulation of pet food and animal feed labels, labeling, and advertising. One resolution discusses the development of “an animal food label review service for compliance with AAFCO model bill and rules” to provide a program for pet food and animal feed manufacturers to obtain uniform labeling feedback from state regulators, although practically speaking the timing for the development and implementation of any such program is unclear. The second resolution protests the preemption language in the PURR Act and similar language in Section 772 of H.R. 4121 (described below), and states that AAFCO will work with its partners, industry, and other trade associations to urge Congress to reject any bill or provision therein that would preempt state authorities on pet food and animal feed.
Innovative Feed Enhancement and Economic Development Act of 2025
On March 18, 2025, the Innovative FEED Act of 2025 (H.R. 2203) was introduced in the House by a bipartisan group of members and referred to the House Committee on Energy and Commerce. A companion bill (S. 1906) was introduced in the United States Senate and referred to the Senate Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry on May 22, 2025.
H.R. 2203 and S. 1906 are identical to bills that were introduced in the House and Senate in 2023 (H.R. 6687 and S. 1842) but that languished in the previous session of Congress. If the bills become law in their current form, they would change how FDA currently regulates animal food and feed ingredients that are intended to affect the structure or function of an animal in certain ways. Historically, FDA’s Center for Veterinary Medicine (CVM) has taken the position that nutritional ingredients or products that make production claims, and non-nutritive ingredients or products that make claims describing an intended effect on the structure or function of an animal’s body, are animal drugs—meaning, that they would have to go through FDA’s new animal drug application process to be marketed, rather than the less burdensome food additive petition process. CVM articulated this position in its now-withdrawn CVM Policy and Procedures Manual (PPM) 1240.3605, Regulating Animal Foods with Drug Claims, which was last updated in 1998. CVM has maintained that under its policy, animal food ingredients and products with claims relating to environmental benefits or effects on the animal microbiome likely would be considered animal drugs. In 2021, CVM initiated a review of PPM 1240.3605 in response to industry and government interest, and held a virtual listening session the following year to gather stakeholder input on the regulation of animal foods with certain types of claims. See our prior alert for more information regarding CVM’s previous policy and the comments submitted to the agency during the virtual listening session. In May 2024, CVM withdrew PPM 1240.3605 and announced its intention to issue guidance to clarify its current thinking on the regulation of certain animal food ingredients and products intended to affect the structure or any function of an animal’s body.
The Innovative FEED Act of 2025 would amend the FDCA to create a new category of animal food additives, named “zootechnical animal food substances,” and deem these substances to be food additives and therefore subject to FDA premarket approval.
The bill defines “zootechnical animal food substance” as a substance added to the food or drinking water of animals that is intended to “(i) affect the byproducts of the digestive process of an animal, (ii) reduce the presence of foodborne pathogens of human health significance in an animal intended to be used for food; or (iii) affect the structure or function of the body of the animal, other than by providing nutritive value, by altering the animal’s gastrointestinal microbiome” and “achieves its intended effect by acting solely within the gastrointestinal tract of the animal.” The definition explicitly excludes hormones; ionophores; substances intended for use in the diagnosis, cure, mitigation, treatment, or prevention of disease in an animal; and substances approved as a drug under FDCA section 512, conditionally approved under FDCA section 571, indexed under FDCA section 572, or for which “substantial clinical investigations have been instituted and for which the existence of such investigations has been made public.”
If enacted, the Innovative FEED Act would add a new paragraph to FDCA section 409(b) requiring that food additive petitions for a zootechnical animal food substance contain, among other things, “all relevant data” on the substance’s intended effect and “the quantity of such substance required to produce the intended effect” and “full reports of investigations made with respect to the intended use of such substance.” In addition, the bill would require that the food additive regulation for the substance specify “the conditions under which such substance may be used to achieve the intended effect.” The bill also would add new FDCA section 409(l) requiring that the labeling of a zootechnical animal food substance bear the statement “Not for use in the diagnosis, cure, mitigation, treatment, or prevention of disease in animals” and permitting claims regarding the intended effect on the structure or function of the body of animals.
CVM currently has two draft guidance for industry (GFI) documents under development that appear to address the use of zootechnical animal food substances in animal food as well as permissible structure function claims for animal food—Draft GFI #289 (Use of Zootechnical Substances in Animal Food) and Draft GFI #291 (Animal Food Intended to Affect the Structure or Function of the Animal). At AAFCO’s 2025 annual meeting, Timothy Schell, Acting Director for CVM, stated that the agency intends to publish Draft GFIs #289 and #291 if the Innovative FEED Act is not enacted. Absent the enactment of the Innovative Feed Act, it seems likely that CVM would seek to maintain its position that it cannot regulate non-nutritive ingredients that are intended to affect the structure or function of animals as food additives, and the guidance documents will provide a framework for enforcement discretion for certain intended uses and claims.
Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2026
Section 772 of the House appropriations bill for Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies programs (H.R. 4121), which was introduced into the House on June 25, 2025, incorporates a number of the provisions of the PURR Act of 2025, including those relating to GRAS status of ingredients eligible for use in animal food pursuant to listing in chapter 6 of the AAFCO Official Publication, “natural” claims, and requirements that FDA issue relevant guidance and regulations within specified time periods. Notably, unlike the PURR Act of 2025, Section 772 of H.R. 4121 extends to all animal food and feed, and the preemption provision only bars states from directly or indirectly establishing, maintaining, implementing, or enforcing any authority or requirement relating to the labels, labeling, or advertising of animal food as it relates to “natural” claims.
As discussed above, AAFCO has expressed its opposition to any legislation that would preempt or diminish the regulatory authority of state animal food and feed programs, and recently passed a resolution protesting the preemption provision in Sec. 772 of H.R. 4121.
What should you do?
Pet food and animal feed companies and manufacturers of ingredients used in pet foods and animal feeds who are in favor of the proposed changes, oppose such changes, or who have concerns and/or questions should consider reaching out to their trade associations or congressional representatives. Companies would be wise to continue to monitor developments in this space and implement plans to adapt to regulatory changes should these bills or policies be adopted.
If you have any questions concerning the material discussed in this client alert, please contact the members of our Animal Food and Drug practice.
Back
