What does EU Food Contact Materials Regulation (EC 1935/2004) require and does it protect your family?
The European Union's framework regulation requiring that all materials intended to come into contact with food must not transfer harmful quantities of chemicals to food. EC 1935/2004 covers plastics, coatings, metals, silicone, and other materials, and is generally more precautionary than the US FDA approach to food-contact safety.
Renee · Founder & Lead Researcher, R3
We score every product the same way and never accept brand payment. We may earn a commission from some links, which never changes a score. How we stay independent.
Quick facts
Get the research before you buy
New picks and safety research, no spam, no sponsors.
The claim: Products sold in the US meet the same food-contact standards as products sold in the EU
The reality: The US and EU food-contact regulatory frameworks are fundamentally different. The EU uses a positive list system where substances must be authorized before use, with migration limits set through independent EFSA evaluation. The US allows manufacturer self-GRAS determination, where a company can decide its own chemical is safe for food contact without FDA review. The EU requires traceability and Declarations of Compliance; the US does not. For specific substance categories like PFAS, the EU is moving toward comprehensive restrictions while the US has focused on voluntary phase-outs. Products made for the EU market are generally subject to more rigorous food-contact safety evaluation than products made only for the US market.
When we evaluate air fryers and cookware for families, we always check which regulatory standards a product was designed to meet. And one of the most useful questions to ask is: was this product made to EU food-contact standards or only to US standards?
The difference matters. The EU's food-contact safety framework - anchored by Regulation EC 1935/2004 - takes a more precautionary approach than the US FDA food-contact system. Products manufactured to meet EU standards often provide stronger protections against chemical migration from cooking surfaces into food. Understanding this regulation helps you evaluate product quality claims and make more informed choices.
Regulation EC 1935/2004 is the EU's overarching framework law for food-contact materials. It establishes the fundamental principle that any material or article intended to come into contact with food must be sufficiently inert that it does not:
This regulation applies to all materials that contact food - not just during cooking, but during processing, storage, preparation, and serving. For families, that means the nonstick coating on your air fryer basket, the silicone gasket on your water bottle, the ceramic glaze on your cookware, and the filter housing on your water filter all fall under its scope.
EC 1935/2004 covers 17 groups of materials including plastics, coatings, rubber, silicone, metals and alloys, paper and board, ceramics, glass, and active/intelligent materials. The regulation establishes the framework; specific implementing measures set detailed rules for individual material categories.
EC 1935/2004 is a framework - it sets the principles. The detailed, material-specific rules come from implementing regulations. The most important ones for kitchen products:
Regulation EU 10/2011 sets specific migration limits for plastic food-contact materials. It establishes:
The positive list approach is fundamentally different from the US system. In the EU, a substance cannot be used in food-contact plastic unless it has been evaluated and authorized. In the US, manufacturers can self-determine that a substance is GRAS (Generally Recognized as Safe) and use it without FDA pre-approval.
Sets restrictions on BADGE (bisphenol A diglycidyl ether) and related compounds in coatings and lacquers that contact food. Relevant for the interior coatings of canned goods and some cookware coatings.
Sets migration limits for lead and cadmium from ceramic food-contact materials. The EU limits are stricter than FDA limits for these heavy metals.
The European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) is the scientific body that evaluates substances for food-contact use under EC 1935/2004. When a manufacturer wants to use a new substance in food-contact materials, EFSA conducts a risk assessment examining:
EFSA's evaluations are published publicly and form the basis for European Commission decisions on authorizing or restricting substances. This independent scientific review is a key difference from the US system, where FDA food-contact notifications rely heavily on manufacturer-submitted data and where GRAS self-determination allows substances to enter food-contact use without any independent review.
The practical differences between the EU and US approaches affect the products families buy:
Authorization approach. The EU uses a positive list system for plastics - only authorized substances can be used. The US FDA uses a combination of pre-market notification, food additive petitions, and manufacturer self-GRAS determination. The EU approach requires proactive safety evaluation; the US approach places more reliance on manufacturer responsibility.
Many air fryers sold in the US are manufactured by companies that also sell in the EU. Those companies must meet EC 1935/2004 for their EU products - including specific migration limits for chemicals in nonstick basket coatings. When we see a brand that carries EU food-contact compliance documentation for the same product sold in the US, that is a meaningful quality signal. The EU's migration testing protocol includes high-temperature fatty food conditions that directly simulate air frying. Products that pass EU testing have been evaluated under conditions relevant to how your family actually uses the appliance.
EC 1935/2004 is a regulation designed to protect health, not a chemical. The health concerns it addresses include:
Chemical migration from cooking surfaces. When food contacts heated materials, chemical compounds can migrate from the material into the food. EC 1935/2004's migration limits cap the amount of individual substances and total substances that can transfer. Exceeding these limits could result in chronic low-level chemical exposure over years of daily use.
PFAS in nonstick coatings. PFAS compounds in PTFE coatings are a primary concern for air fryer and cookware users. The EU's migration testing includes conditions that simulate high-temperature cooking with fatty foods - the scenario most relevant to PFAS migration from nonstick surfaces.
Heavy metals in ceramics and glazes. Lead and cadmium in ceramic glazes and decorative coatings can migrate into food, particularly under acidic conditions. EU limits for lead and cadmium migration from ceramics are stricter than US FDA limits.
Endocrine disruptors. The EU framework is increasingly focused on endocrine-disrupting chemicals in food-contact materials, including bisphenols and phthalates. EFSA's risk assessments consider endocrine disruption as a specific hazard category.
EC 1935/2004: - Enacted: October 27, 2004 - Effective: November 3, 2004 (published in Official Journal of the EU) - Scope: All materials and articles intended to come into contact with food across 17 material groups - Administered by: European Commission, with scientific support from EFSA - Enforcement: National food safety authorities of EU member states
Key implementing measures: - EU 10/2011: Plastics regulation (positive list, migration limits, food simulants) - EU 2023/2006: Good manufacturing practice for food-contact materials - 84/500/EEC (amended): Ceramic articles - lead and cadmium migration limits - EU 1895/2005: Epoxy derivatives in coatings
Pending developments: - EU-wide PFAS restriction under REACH review by ECHA (decision expected 2025-2027) - European Commission revision of EC 1935/2004 framework under consideration, including potential harmonized rules for materials beyond plastics - EFSA re-evaluation of tolerable daily intake for PFAS (2020 opinion set TDI at 4.4 ng/kg body weight per week for sum of four PFAS)
Relationship to US framework: - EC 1935/2004 is generally more precautionary than FDA food-contact regulations - Positive list approach (EU) vs. self-GRAS determination (US) - Mandatory Declaration of Compliance (EU) vs. no equivalent requirement (US) - Full traceability required (EU) vs. no equivalent requirement (US)
Who is most at risk
Look for these
Watch out for
What this does NOT cover
Food-contact materials sold exclusively outside the EU - the regulation has no jurisdiction beyond EU/EEA borders The durability of food-contact materials over time - migration testing is performed on new products under defined conditions Environmental impact of food-contact materials (recycling, disposal) - addressed by separate EU environmental regulations Appliance electrical safety - covered by EU Low Voltage Directive and IEC standards, not food-contact regulations Genetically modified organisms or allergens in food - governed by separate EU food safety regulations
How to verify
Request the manufacturer's Declaration of Compliance with EC 1935/2004 - EU law requires manufacturers to have this document available. Check EFSA's website (efsa.europa.eu) for published scientific opinions on specific food-contact substances. For migration test results, look for references to EU 10/2011 test conditions (specific food simulants and time-temperature protocols). To verify LFGB compliance, check for test reports from accredited German testing laboratories. The EU's RASFF (Rapid Alert System for Food and Feed) database at ec.europa.eu/food/safety/rasff lists notifications for food-contact materials that violate EU requirements.
EC 1935/2004 vs. FDA Food Contact
The EU requires positive list authorization and independent EFSA evaluation. The US allows manufacturer self-GRAS determination. The EU mandates Declarations of Compliance and full traceability; the US does not.
EC 1935/2004 vs. LFGB
EC 1935/2004 is the EU-wide framework. LFGB is Germany's national implementation, which sets stricter limits for certain substances. LFGB certification exceeds EC 1935/2004 requirements.
EC 1935/2004 vs. REACH
EC 1935/2004 governs food-contact safety specifically. REACH governs chemical safety broadly across all uses. Both apply to food-contact materials, but REACH addresses chemical registration, evaluation, and restriction while EC 1935/2004 addresses migration and food safety.
EU Positive List vs. US GRAS System
The EU authorizes specific substances for food-contact use through expert evaluation. The US allows manufacturers to self-determine that substances are 'generally recognized as safe' without FDA review. The EU approach is more precautionary; the US approach is more industry-reliant.
What this means for your family
Every product scored on safety, efficacy, and usability - so you know which products to trust around eu food contact materials regulation (ec 1935/2004).
Get the Air Fryer shortlist, free
The picks that cleared safety, what to skip, and why price didn’t predict the winner.
No spam. Unsubscribe any time.
No - EC 1935/2004 is EU law and applies only to products sold in the EU and EEA. However, many manufacturers produce products for both markets and often manufacture to the stricter EU standard globally. If a brand sells the same air fryer model in both the US and EU, there is a reasonable chance the US version meets EU food-contact standards. But you cannot assume this without checking the manufacturer's compliance documentation.
Generally yes, for several reasons. The EU requires positive list authorization with independent EFSA scientific evaluation before substances can be used in food-contact plastics. The US allows manufacturers to self-determine that substances are GRAS without FDA review. The EU mandates Declarations of Compliance and full supply chain traceability - the US does not. The EU sets specific migration limits through standardized testing protocols, while the US system allows more manufacturer discretion. For PFAS specifically, the EU is moving toward comprehensive restrictions while the US has relied on voluntary phase-outs.
The glass-and-fork symbol is required by EC 1935/2004 on food-contact materials sold in the EU when the product's food-contact purpose is not obvious from its appearance. It indicates that the material or article is intended for contact with food and has been evaluated under applicable EU food-contact regulations. For products like cookware and air fryer baskets where food contact is obvious, the symbol may or may not be present - but the regulatory requirements still apply.
EU 10/2011 specifies standardized migration testing using food simulants - liquids that mimic different food types. Simulant A (10% ethanol) represents aqueous foods. Simulant B (3% acetic acid) represents acidic foods. Simulant D2 (vegetable oil or isooctane) represents fatty foods. Tests are conducted at specific temperatures and durations that simulate real cooking conditions. For air fryer baskets, the high-temperature fatty food simulant test is most relevant. Both overall migration (total substances) and specific migration (individual chemicals) must stay within defined limits.
Indirectly, yes. If the proposed universal PFAS restriction under REACH is adopted, manufacturers will need PFAS-free alternatives for their EU products. Most major brands will not maintain separate PFAS and PFAS-free production lines - they will transition their entire global product range. This means US consumers will benefit from PFAS-free alternatives driven by EU regulation, even without equivalent US restrictions. The timeline depends on when ECHA issues its decision and the transition periods granted.
A Declaration of Compliance (DoC) is a document required under EC 1935/2004 confirming that a food-contact material meets all applicable EU requirements. It must include information about the materials used, migration testing results, and regulatory compliance. Manufacturers must provide DoCs to their business customers and have them available for enforcement authorities. As a consumer, you can request this document from the manufacturer. Brands that publish DoCs or provide them upon request demonstrate transparency about their food-contact material safety.
EC 1935/2004 sets the framework principle that food-contact materials must not transfer harmful substances. For PFAS specifically, the EU approach involves multiple regulations working together. EFSA set a tolerable weekly intake of 4.4 ng/kg body weight for the sum of four PFAS in 2020 - one of the most restrictive PFAS limits globally. The pending REACH universal PFAS restriction would go further by potentially banning PFAS-based coatings entirely. Current EC 1935/2004 migration testing includes conditions that capture PFAS migration, but a comprehensive ban would come through REACH rather than through EC 1935/2004 directly.
Migration testing. Both systems use migration testing, but the EU specifies standardized food simulants (liquids that mimic acidic foods, fatty foods, alcoholic foods, etc.) and standardized time-temperature conditions that must be used. The EU's migration testing protocols are more prescriptive and leave less room for manufacturer interpretation.
PFAS treatment. This is where the difference is most relevant for air fryer shoppers. The EU has been moving toward restricting PFAS in food-contact materials more aggressively than the US. Denmark banned PFAS in food packaging in 2020. The EU-wide restriction proposal under REACH would cover food-contact materials including cookware coatings. Meanwhile, the US FDA has secured voluntary phase-outs of some PFAS from food packaging but has not restricted PFAS in cookware coatings.
Traceability. EC 1935/2004 requires full traceability of food-contact materials throughout the supply chain. Each business must be able to identify its supplier and the businesses it has supplied. The US has no equivalent traceability requirement for food-contact materials.
Declaration of Compliance. Under EC 1935/2004, manufacturers must provide a Declaration of Compliance (DoC) confirming their food-contact materials meet all applicable EU requirements. This declaration must be available to enforcement authorities and, for business-to-business transactions, to customers. The US has no equivalent mandatory compliance declaration.
Here is why this matters when you are comparing products on a shelf or online listing:
Products designed for the EU market meet stricter chemical migration standards. If an air fryer was manufactured for sale in the EU and carries a Declaration of Compliance with EC 1935/2004, its food-contact surfaces have been tested against specific migration limits using standardized protocols. That is a meaningful data point.
Dual-market products often meet EU standards globally. Many major cookware and appliance manufacturers produce a single product for both EU and US markets. It is more efficient to manufacture to the stricter EU standard than to maintain separate production lines. When you see a brand that sells in both markets, there is a reasonable chance the US version meets EU food-contact standards - though you cannot assume this without verification.
EU-manufactured products are not automatically safer. EC 1935/2004 compliance means the product met EU requirements at the time of manufacture. It does not guarantee the absence of all chemicals of concern, and it does not address coating durability over years of use. A PTFE-coated air fryer basket that meets EC 1935/2004 migration limits when new may still contain PFAS - the migration was just within EU limits.
LFGB certification goes further. Germany's LFGB (Lebensmittel-, Bedarfsgegenstande- und Futtermittelgesetzbuch) sets even stricter limits than EC 1935/2004 for certain substances. Products with LFGB certification have met German national requirements that exceed the EU baseline.
The most significant pending development under the EU food-contact framework is the universal PFAS restriction proposed under REACH by five EU/EEA member states (Germany, Denmark, the Netherlands, Norway, and Sweden). This proposal would restrict the manufacture, sale, and use of approximately 10,000 PFAS chemicals across all applications - including food-contact materials.
If adopted, this restriction would effectively ban PFAS-based nonstick coatings (including PTFE) in cookware and air fryer baskets sold in the EU. The proposal is currently under review by the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA), with a decision expected in the 2025-2027 timeframe. Transition periods of several years would follow adoption.
This matters for US families because it would drive global manufacturers to develop PFAS-free alternatives for their entire product lines - changes that would likely reach US markets even without equivalent US regulation.
When we evaluate air fryers, cookware, bottles, and water filters, EU food-contact compliance is a positive factor in our assessment. Specifically:
We check for Declaration of Compliance. Brands that publish or provide a Declaration of Compliance with EC 1935/2004 demonstrate that their food-contact materials have been evaluated against a rigorous standard.
We note LFGB and other national certifications. LFGB certification goes beyond EC 1935/2004 and is a strong indicator of food-contact safety.
We compare to FDA baseline. Products meeting only FDA minimum requirements receive a lower confidence score for chemical safety than products meeting EU standards - because the EU framework requires more rigorous pre-market evaluation and sets stricter migration limits for many substances.
We track the PFAS restriction. The pending EU PFAS restriction will reshape the global cookware market. We monitor its progress and factor its trajectory into our assessment of brands that are proactively transitioning to PFAS-free coatings.