EFSA’s role in the evaluation and integration of Codex MRLs into EU legislation and what it means for market access

Between March and October 2025, the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) published four evaluations that provide important updates on how Codex Maximum Residue Limits (CXLs) are being handled within EU legislation. These evaluations reflect EFSA’s ongoing work to align international standards with EU regulations – a process that has direct implications for companies trading food and agricultural products in Europe.

1. CCPR revokes 111 CXLs – EFSA reviews EU impact

Publication: EFSA Journal, 23(3), e9299

The 55th Codex Committee on Pesticide Residues (CCPR) revoked 111 CXLs for 16 active substances. Most were removed because the pesticide/commodity combinations were no longer supported by manufacturers or lacked sufficient supporting data. In other cases, the revocations were based on new or alternative MRL proposals developed by the Joint FAO/WHO Meeting on Pesticide Residues (JMPR) – reflecting updated agricultural uses or risk assessments. Some revocations also addressed discrepancies in the Codex MRL database. In such cases, new CXLs replaced the revoked ones.
To address these changes, EFSA worked with Member States to gather data on national authorisations and import tolerances. Using a decision tree, EFSA identified which revoked CXLs had been transposed into EU legislation. Where the Codex and EU limits and definitions matched, EFSA carried out a detailed assessment.

Outcome of EFSA’s assessment

Overall, EFSA identified eight revoked CXLs set above the limit of quantification (>LOQ) and 11 revoked CXLs set at the limit of quantification (LOQ) that required detailed assessment. Following this review:

• Two new fallback MRLs proposed to maintain EU compliance
• One MRL postponed pending further evaluation
• Three MRLs replaced by new CXLs
• One MRL flagged for risk management consideration
• The remaining MRLs deemed acceptable and left unchanged

2. EFSA reviews CXLs previously flagged by the EU

Publication: EFSA supporting publication 2025:EN-9447. 11 pp

EFSA was mandated by the European Commission to compile an inventory of Codex MRLs that the EU had previously placed under reservation due to ongoing evaluations. This was done to clarify their current status and prioritise substances for reassessment.

EFSA’s review included:

• Screening 5,199 CXLs adopted by the Codex Alimentarius Commission (CAC) between 2009 and 2024
• Identifying 496 CXLs covering 49 active substances for further review

Of the 49 active substances affected:

Five prioritised for reassessment: acetamiprid, cyazofamid, ethiprole, oxathiapiprolin, trinexapac-ethyl

• Five undergoing further evaluation: bifenthrin, clofentezine, dicamba, glyphosate and pyrasulfutole
• 12 require no further action: carbendazim, chlorpyrifos-methyl, clothianidin, cypermethrins, diflubenzuron,fenpyroximate, fluopyram, imidacloprid, pendimethalin, propiconazole, spirotetramat andthiamethoxam
• 27 are either subject to ongoing EU evaluation or pending risk management decisions

3. Inventory of withdrawn CXLs

Publication: EFSA supporting publication 2025:EN-9454. 13 pp

CCPR and CAC have withdrawn thousands of MRLs over the years, however the EU currently lacks a formal process to respond to these changes. EFSA has created a database to identify which EU MRLs may be based on now-revoked CXLs.

EFSA has:

• Reviewed 3,572 revoked CXLs covering 115 different active substance adopted by the CAC between 2009 and 2022
• Identified 348 revoked CXLs covering 38 active substances that match current EU MRLs and enforcement residue definitions

Next steps

EFSA will reassess these 348 revoked CXLs, starting with substances whose AIR renewals haven’t yet begun or are in early stages. These include abamectin, bentazone, cyantraniliprole, fluazifop-p-butyl, kresoxim-methyl, tolclofos-methyl and trifloxystrobin.

Reassessment of diquat, methidathion and pyraclostrobin is pending risk management decisions. Other substances will be reviewed under different frameworks or have already been assessed.

4. Scientific support for preparing an EU position in the 56th Session of the Codex Committee on Pesticide Residues (CCPR)

Publication: EFSA Journal 2025;23:e9640. 237 pp

The European Commission requested EFSA to review the 2024 JMPR Report (FAO/WHO, 2025) recommendations, proposed Codex MRLs, and related documents to support EU positions for CCPR56.

In total, JMPR reviewed 37 active substances:

• Seven were examined as part of the periodic review process
• Another seven were assessed by JMPR for the first time
• The remaining substances were evaluated to establish new CXLs based on new uses or updated information

Outcome of the review:

• Eight substances had supportable Codex MRL proposals (hexythiazox, etofenprox, tebufenozide, spinosad, acetamiprid, flupyradifurone, phosphonic acid, florpyrauxifen-benzyl)
• Three substances had no codex MRLs proposed (lambda-cyhalothrin, acynonapyr, carfentrazone-ethyl)
• One substance had Codex MRLs withdrawn (ethoxyquin)
• 21 substances – the final EU position should be discussed/decided by risk managers (chlormequat, folpet, maleic hydrazide, phosmet, permethrin, prochloraz, methoprene, buprofezin, fenpyroximate, fipronil, novaluron, azoxystrobin, cyproconazole, flubendiamide, fluazinam, pydiflumetofen, tetraniliprole cyclobutrifluram, fenpropidin, fluoxapiprolin)
• One substance – setting of codex MRLs in the future is not expected (chlorpyrifos)
• One substance had no new information provided and therefore the EU position taken in CCPR55 stands (propiconazole)
• One substance had a general reservation due to the ongoing renewal process (tebuconazole)
• One substance – discussion with MS needed to determine if MRLs are acceptable due to pending review of EU MRLs following the withdrawal of the EU approval (acibenzolar-S-methyl)

EFSA’s comments on JMPR evaluations aim to support the EU position for the 56th CCPR session. They are based on JMPR’s published data and current EU guidance, and may require revision if further information becomes available.

Why these processes matter

Differences between Codex and EU MRLs can create trade barriers and affect compliance. EFSA’s review of JMPR evaluations is critical to protect consumer health, uphold EU legislation, and support international alignment. By contributing to CCPR discussions, EFSA helps harmonise standards, reduce market disruptions, and provide evidence-based guidance for policy decisions

What should industry do?

If your product depends on Codex-aligned MRLs, it’s essential to:

• Monitor regulatory developments
• Review your compliance status
• Prepare for potential reassessments