The recent adoption of Implementing Regulation (EU) 2025/661 introduces a significant amendment to the product specification for the PDO Parmigiano Reggiano, specifically concerning the maximum age requirement for the inclusion of bovines in the production chain, now set at ten months. This article examines the relevant European regulatory framework, the objectives underlying the amendment, and its legal implications, including an analysis of the opposition procedure initiated by Austria and subsequently dismissed. Furthermore, the paper explores the broader regulatory context, with particular reference to the new Regulation (EU) 2024/1143, which recasts and innovates the legal regime governing geographical indications. This normative evolution provides interpretative tools crucial to understanding the systemic scope of the amendment. Lastly, the study addresses the operational consequences for livestock farmers and the prospective developments of the PDO system, highlighting the legal significance of the measure and the organisational and economic challenges it poses to the Parmigiano Reggiano supply chain.
table of contents:
1. The Role of the Product Specification in Agri-Food PDOs
Within the European legal regime governing protected geographical indications, amendments to product specifications are crucial for the evolution of quality agrifood supply chains. Such amendments, particularly when classified as ‘non-minor’ under Article 53 of Regulation (EU) No. 1151/20121, affect substantial elements of the production method and require a structured and formalised approval process at the European Union level.
In this context, the adoption of Implementing Regulation (EU) 2025/6612 formally approves an amendment to the product specification, (‘disciplinare di produzione’) of the Protected Designation of Origin ‘Parmigiano Reggiano‘. The regulation intervenes on a central aspect of the production system, specifically the admission of bovines into the production chain, particularly impacting Article 9 of the specification, which regulates the feeding of animals allowed in the production of raw materials used for the protected cheese.
The regulatory intervention replaces the previous rule, which allowed a four-month dietary transition period for animals originating from different supply chains, introducing a more stringent age-based criterion: animals may now be included in the PDO chain only if introduced before completing their tenth month of age. This modification, as will be seen, has generated not only an opposition procedure between Member States but also a debate on balancing quality protection requirements and internal market principles.
The intervention, motivated by the necessity to strengthen the link between product and territory, ensure greater uniformity in raw material management, and simplify compliance controls, was promoted by the Consorzio del Parmigiano Reggiano under the procedure established by Articles 49 et seq. of Regulation (EU) No. 1151/2012 of the European Parliament and Council of 21 November 2012 on quality schemes for agricultural products and foodstuffs3.
The approval of the amendment followed a complex procedure, including Italy’s formal submission of the application, publication of the proposed amendment in the Official Journal of the European Union (OJEU)4, and an articulated interstate opposition phase initiated by Austria, challenging the compatibility of the new rule with the principles of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union concerning the free movement of goods5. Following consultations between interested Member States, concluded without agreement, the Commission adopted the measure, deeming it proportionate to the objectives pursued and not constituting an unjustified restriction on the internal market.
This case presents several points of interest from the perspective of European agrifood law. It involves the very concept of the link between quality and geographical origin, forming the legal foundation of PDO, raising important questions regarding the legal qualification of specification amendments, the protection of typicality in regulated production systems, and balancing the freedom of movement and geographical indications protection. This article aims to examine in detail the regulatory and procedural context of Implementing Regulation (EU) 2025/661, analyse the content of the approved amendment, reconstruct the terms of the opposition procedure initiated by Austria, and finally offer critical considerations on the legal and systemic implications of the Commission’s decision.
2. The Regulatory Context of the Amendments to the Parmigiano Reggiano PDO Specification
The amendment to the product specification for the PDO ‘Parmigiano Reggiano”, approved by Implementing Regulation (EU) 2025/661, falls within the regulatory framework established by Regulation (EU) No. 1151/20126 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 November 2012 on quality schemes for agricultural products and foodstuffs7. Until the entry into force of the new Regulation (EU) 2024/1143, this regulation remained the primary legal reference for Protected Designations of Origin (PDOs)8 and Protected Geographical Indications (PGIs), laying down the conditions for registration,9 protection, use, and modification of designations.
Within this framework, Article 7 of the regulation assigns a central role to the product specification: it is the normative instrument that gives concrete effect to the link between the product and its territory. It defines in binding terms the characteristics of the product, the methods of production, the geographical delimitation, the elements proving the origin, historical and documentary evidence, as well as the control system. Technically speaking, it constitutes a sector-specific regulatory act, of a negotiated but binding nature, which governs the entire supply chain and serves as the primary source for assessing the conformity of each production phase with the requirements of the PDO.
Given this central role, the procedure for amending the product specification is governed with precision and rigour by Articles 49 to 53 of Regulation (EU) No. 1151/2012. In particular, Article 53 distinguishes between minor amendments, which may be approved through a simplified procedure, and non-minor amendments, which affect essential elements of the registration—such as the production method, geographical delimitation, product characteristics, or the link with the environment—and therefore require a full approval process by the European Commission. The amendment under examination clearly falls within the latter category, as it concerns a substantive aspect of the production method: the maximum age for the introduction of animals into the supply chain, with direct effects on the alignment of livestock practices with the defined geographical environment and, consequently, on the typicality of the product.
From a temporal perspective, pursuant to Article 90(1) of Regulation (EU) 2024/114310 — which recasts and replaces the 2012 framework — applications submitted prior to its entry into force continue to be examined in accordance with the provisions of Regulation (EU) No. 1151/2012. Consequently, the procedure initiated by the Consorzio del Parmigiano Reggiano and culminating in the Commission’s approval was lawfully conducted under the pre-existing regulatory framework, albeit during a transitional phase already marked by the formal adoption of the new regulation.
3. The New Regulation (EU) 2024/1143: From the Parmigiano Reggiano Case to a Systematic Recasting of PDO Rules
The adoption of Regulation (EU) 2024/1143 of the European Parliament and of the Council, which recasts the legislation on geographical indications (GIs), represents a systemic regulatory intervention aimed at rationalising and simplifying the entire EU legal framework on agricultural and food GIs11. The new regulation, which entered into force on 5 May 2024 and will apply from 1 January 2025 (Art. 91), repeals Regulation (EU) No. 1151/2012 without compromising its functional continuity, as demonstrated by the transitional provisions contained in Article 9012.
Among the key innovations introduced, particular attention should be paid to the new classification of amendments to product specifications: the regulation now distinguishes between ‘ordinary amendments’ (Art. 21) and ‘minor amendments’ (Art. 22), moving beyond the traditional dichotomy of ‘minor’ and ‘non-minor’ amendments13. Ordinary amendments—comparable in substance and impact to the ‘non-minor’ amendments under the previous regime—remain subject to a comprehensive procedure involving publication and the possibility of opposition. Minor amendments, however, can be approved through a simplified procedure managed at national level. Nonetheless, such amendments must be notified to the Commission, which retains the authority to request further clarifications or integrations, maintaining harmonised oversight14.
Alongside procedural simplification, the regulation introduces significant governance innovations, granting the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)15 a technical-supportive role in assessing applications, coordinated with the European Commission (Art. 65). This choice fits into a broader plan of digitalisation and streamlining of procedures related to GIs16.
Notably, the regulation reinforces the role of the protection consortia, as defined in Articles 39 to 41. The formal legitimacy of these consortia, already recognised in practice and jurisprudence, is now explicitly codified by the European legislator, enhancing their role not merely in promotion but also in technical management and supervision. To obtain recognition, consortia will need to demonstrate qualified representativeness according to stricter criteria and will play an active role in procedures for amending specifications and countering evocations and usurpations17.
Finally, the new regulation integrates an environmental sustainability dimension into the GI framework, aligning with the European Green Deal and the Farm to Fork strategy18. Amendments to product specifications may now also be justified based on environmental, energy-related, or climate impact criteria (Art. 21(2)(d)), allowing for an evolutionary interpretation of the link between territory, quality, and ecological responsibility.
From this perspective, the amendment to the Parmigiano Reggiano specification—although approved under Regulation (EU) No. 1151/2012—anticipates some of the principles now formalised in Regulation (EU) 2024/1143, such as strengthening territorial linkages, integrity of the production method, and consistency in animal origin with PDO identity. Therefore, it can be considered a paradigmatic case of the regulatory transition, useful for understanding the future application of Articles 23 (special cases) and 41 (functions of the consortia), as well as the evolution of jurisprudence and administrative practices concerning geographical indications.
4. The New Article 9 of the Product Specification: Content and Normative Scope
The amendment approved by Implementing Regulation (EU) 2025/661 concerns a significant part of the PDO ‘Parmigiano Reggiano’ product specification, specifically Article 9 in the section titled ‘Feeding Regulations for Dairy Cows’. Previously, the specification permitted the introduction of animals from different supply chains into the Parmigiano Reggiano system, provided these animals underwent a four-month dietary transition period, during which they adapted to the dietary regime prescribed by the specification.
This provision aimed at ensuring the milk produced was consistent with PDO quality standards, while still allowing a degree of flexibility in livestock management practices, particularly regarding herd replacement, i.e., the integration of young dairy cows into the production cycle. However, as clarified in Recital 9 of the Implementing Regulation, practical application of the transitional provision revealed significant critical issues during compliance inspections, due to difficulties in clearly separating compliant animals from those undergoing dietary adaptation, and the consequent risk of mixing compliant and non-compliant milk19.
Given these practical issues, Article 9 was reformulated to entirely eliminate the transitional period, introducing instead a strict age-based criterion: from the entry into force of the regulation, the introduction of animals originating from supply chains other than that of Parmigiano Reggiano into herds intended for PDO milk production (or replacement herds) must occur no later than the completion of their tenth month of age. This new formulation applies universally to all animals destined to produce milk transformed into Parmigiano Reggiano, regardless of the production cycle stage at which they find themselves.
The literal interpretation of the norm is clear: it establishes a rigid temporal limitation that acts as a prerequisite for animal admission into the PDO supply chain. No subsequent dietary adaptation mechanisms are allowed; on the contrary, it explicitly requires that animals be introduced into the supply chain before reaching ten months of age, thus ensuring conformity with the dietary regime of the specification prior to lactation, and thus prior to any production of milk destined for certified transformation.
The normative scope of this provision is significant. It directly affects herd replacement management, obliging farmers to plan the introduction of new cows into their herds well in advance and to verify compliance with age and livestock conditions at the time of acquisition through traceable documentation systems. Moreover, the provision has systemic impacts on the entire dairy-cheese production chain, reinforcing coherence among diet, environment, and product identity. In other words, it integrates and consolidates the relationship between the production method and geographic origin—the foundational element of the PDO—establishing that milk cannot be considered compliant if it comes from animals that, even if subsequently adapted, spent their initial ten months in dietary and environmental conditions alien to the certified supply chain.
Ultimately, this measure aims at reinforcing the typicality of Parmigiano Reggiano by aligning the entire livestock production cycle to the product specification from an early stage, thus fostering qualitative homogeneity of the raw material and traceability of the finished product. This intervention fits coherently within the framework of European PDOs, where vertical integration of raw material, environment, and processing constitutes the main guarantee of authenticity and legal protection of the product.
4.1. The Concept of ‘Origin’ in PDOs and the Relevance of the Age Requirement
In the European legislation governing Protected Designations of Origin, the term ‘origin’ plays a central role, assuming a precise legal connotation. According to Regulation (EU) No. 1151/2012, the origin of a product does not merely indicate a generic or incidental geographic provenance. Rather, it reflects a qualified and rigorous relationship between the product’s quality characteristics and a specific geographical environment. More specifically, Article 5(1) of the cited regulation clarifies that a PDO identifies a product originating from a specific place, ‘whose quality or characteristics are essentially or exclusively due to a particular geographical environment and its inherent natural and human factors’. This definition clearly demonstrates that geographic origin is intertwined, within the EU regulatory perspective, with production factors that are specific and historically rooted in a given territory.
Within this framework, the new age requirement introduced by Implementing Regulation (EU) 2025/661 acquires particular legal and operational significance. Setting the maximum age of animals for the production of milk used in Parmigiano Reggiano at ten months means explicitly and bindingly defining the temporal scope of the link between the production environment and the animal, ensuring verification of essential quality conditions at the earliest stages of the animal’s life. In this sense, the age requirement is not simply an organisational criterion; it takes on the nature of a substantive condition aimed at preserving and reinforcing the genetic and environmental connection between the animal and the geographic area delimited by the PDO.
From an operational perspective, this provision obliges livestock farmers to guarantee the conformity of animals from the pre-lactation phase onwards, preventing the introduction into the production chain of mature animals coming from geographic and dietary contexts inconsistent with those stipulated in the Parmigiano Reggiano specification. This ensures a full and verifiable coherence between the environmental and dietary conditions of animal husbandry and the specific quality of the milk produced, a fundamental aspect that distinctly characterises the supply chain of this renowned PDO.
The rationale for this amendment can be further understood in light of the consolidated jurisprudence of the Court of Justice of the European Union, which has repeatedly affirmed that the protection of a designation of origin must rest on objective and verifiable criteria of territoriality and quality intrinsically linked to a specific territory20. From this perspective, the new requirement set forth in the product specification helps ensure—in a more rigorous and verifiable manner—that the final product originates exclusively from raw materials conforming to the territorial and qualitative requirements laid down in the specification, rather than from animals introduced from supply chains alien to the normative and productive system characteristic of the PDO Parmigiano Reggiano.
Thus, the decision to set the maximum age for introducing animals into the production chain at ten months functions as a reinforced guarantee of compliance with the specification and as an additional element safeguarding the reputational and economic value of the PDO, which EU legislation aims to protect as a collective intellectual property right, pursuant to Articles 13 et seq. of Regulation (EU) No. 1151/201221.
4.2. Zootechnical, Production, and Organisational Implications of the New Regulation
The amendment introduced by Implementing Regulation (EU) 2025/661, directly impacting the age requirement of animals destined for milk production within the Parmigiano Reggiano PDO, entails significant zootechnical, managerial, and organisational implications for the entire dairy supply chain involved in the designation.
From a zootechnical perspective, requiring animals originating from supply chains different from that of Parmigiano Reggiano to be introduced into the PDO production chain no later than their tenth month of age raises the standards of genetic, dietary, and management uniformity within the agricultural enterprises participating in the PDO circuit. In practical terms, it establishes a mechanism for early identification of animals, allowing their diet and husbandry practices to align strictly with the rigorous criteria set out in the product specification from the earliest developmental stages.
This inevitably implies that relevant livestock farms, both those directly producing milk and those dedicated to herd replacement, must plan the acquisition or introduction of young animals well in advance. These decisions must rely on the capacity to document precisely and verifiably the compliance with the ten-month age requirement. Consequently, internal systems for animal registration, age management, and individual traceability must be strengthened, in line with the standards already required by European legislation on bovine identification and registration22.
From a strictly production-oriented viewpoint, the amendment considerably simplifies inspection activities. Previously, verifying compliance with the four-month dietary transition period, as specified in the earlier version of the product specification, proved particularly challenging. Indeed, the application of the former rules resulted in operational difficulties in managing animals during their dietary adaptation phase, frequently leading to cases of non-compliance reported by inspection bodies23.
The new rule eliminates these operational ambiguities entirely, enforcing a strict and easily verifiable age criterion, thus allowing inspection activities to focus on documental and physical verification of animal presence and origin rather than on the more complex management of the transitional feeding period. The absence of this adaptation period also reduces margins for error, enhancing overall compliance of livestock farms with the PDO requirements.
At a broader organisational level, the new provision also impacts the livestock replacement market. The imposed temporal constraint creates increased demand for young animals fully compliant with the PDO product specification, thereby stimulating the development of specialised supply chains for the procurement and rearing of animals destined for Parmigiano Reggiano production. This process could incentivise an even more integrated and specialised supply chain, progressively increasing the degree of territorial self-sufficiency for farms participating in the PDO consortium and reducing dependence on external sourcing outside the defined geographical area.
In conclusion, the regulatory amendment introduced by the European Commission reshapes the structural and functional characteristics of the Parmigiano Reggiano production chain, introducing stricter and more precise criteria aimed at ensuring greater qualitative uniformity in the final product and rigorous compliance with the essential link between the product, territory, and local traditional practices.
5. Objectives of the Amendment: Strengthening the Territorial Link under Article 5 of Regulation (EU) No. 1151/2012
The amendment introduced by Implementing Regulation (EU) 2025/661 responds, first and foremost, to the need to further consolidate the link between the PDO Parmigiano Reggiano and its territory of origin—an essential element for the legal protection of this geographical indication pursuant to Article 5(1) of Regulation (EU) No. 1151/2012.
Indeed, under the applicable legislation, the protection granted by the scheme of protected designations of origin presupposes an inseparable connection between the quality of the product and the delimited geographical environment, encompassing both natural factors (climate, soil, water resources, type of local forage) and human factors (traditional farming and processing techniques).
The distinctive quality of a PDO product therefore derives from the specificity of the environmental context and from the cultural and technical heritage of the agricultural community concerned. It is precisely on the basis of this premise that Article 7 of Regulation (EU) No. 1151/2012 establishes that the product specification must contain detailed and precise information on the geographical origin, traditional production methods, and all those aspects capable of determining the typicality and reputation of the protected product.
The new provision concerning the mandatory introduction of animals before the tenth month of age fits exactly within this regulatory logic: it aims to ensure that animals used in the production of milk for Parmigiano Reggiano are fed from the earliest stages of life in accordance with the strict criteria set forth in the specification, in particular the complete exclusion of silage and fermented feedstuffs, and the exclusive use of local forage and traditional plant-based feed. The choice to significantly bring forward the temporal threshold for entry of animals into the supply chain implies that these animals are exposed throughout their productive lives to feeding and environmental conditions that faithfully reflect the local tradition and the geographical context delimited by the specification itself.
This measure thus makes it possible, in an objective and verifiable manner, to exclude production conditions potentially prejudicial to the conformity of milk with the qualitative requirements laid down in the specification, thereby ensuring the full compliance of the final product with the standards of the protected designation. This rationale is recalled in Recital 9 of the European Regulation, which states that the adopted measure allows the quality and traceability objectives set out in the specification to be achieved ‘more efficiently and effectively’24.1 The Commission thus expressly recognises that the age requirement is instrumental to the protection of the product’s typicality and its reputational value, consistently with the general principles established by European Union law and with the interpretative case law of the Court of Justice, which has repeatedly affirmed the centrality of the effective protection of geographical origin and of the typical production method in the PDO regime25.
In conclusion, the strengthening of the territorial link achieved through the amendment approved by the Commission responds to an essential requirement of the protected designation of origin system: to guarantee, with precision and rigour, compliance with the conditions that justify the protection of the quality and reputation of a product. In the case of Parmigiano Reggiano, this link is further substantiated by the new provision requiring compliance with the geographical origin requirement from the earliest stages of animal development, in the interest of both producers and final consumers.
5.1. Protecting the Quality and Reputation of the PDO as Collective Intangible Assets
A second important objective that guided the approval of the amendment to the PDO Parmigiano Reggiano product specification concerns the need to ensure, more effectively than in the past, the intrinsic quality and the reputation of this emblematic product of the Italian agri-food sector. The legal protection granted by the European Union to protected designations of origin responds, in fact, to specific needs for safeguarding both consumers and producers themselves, by prioritising the preservation of authentic quality and the prevention of practices potentially detrimental to the prestige of protected designations26.
The decision of the European Commission to set the maximum age limit for the entry of animals into the supply chain at ten months falls precisely within this perspective of qualitative and reputational protection. In the recitals of Implementing Regulation (EU) 2025/66127, it is in fact clarified that the previous regime of dietary transition, as provided for in the specification, had revealed numerous critical issues from an operational and inspection standpoint, resulting in a significant and growing number of non-compliance cases. These cases mainly concerned the difficulty in ensuring a clear separation between animals fully compliant with the requirements of the specification and those still in the adaptation phase, as well as the complex management of the resulting milk flow.
The new discipline adopted resolves these issues through a clear, precise, and easily verifiable regulatory measure. By eliminating the transitional period of dietary adaptation and significantly bringing forward the maximum age allowed for introducing animals into the production chain, the Commission has expressly sought to reinforce the qualitative consistency of the final product. This measure directly responds to the objective, explicitly stated in Regulation (EU) No. 1151/2012, of ‘ensuring that agricultural and food products with specific characteristics linked to geographical origin are produced in accordance with precise specifications’28.
Furthermore, the amendment appears consistent with the interpretative approach consolidated in the case law of the Court of Justice of the EU, according to which the protective measures for protected designations of origin must be considered legitimate and proportionate when they pursue the aim of preserving the quality, reputation, and authenticity of typical products29. It is precisely this dimension of reputation—legally understood as an intangible yet crucial element for the economic and cultural value of the protected product—that the regulatory amendment contributes to safeguarding effectively, by structurally preventing possible infringements of the specification which would have negative repercussions on consumer perception and trust.
With the adoption of the new provision, therefore, the protection of the quality and reputation of PDO Parmigiano Reggiano is no longer entrusted solely to complex and potentially uncertain inspection activities, but is made structurally more robust, thanks to the introduction of an objective and indisputable parameter such as the maximum age of bovines at the time of entry into the supply chain. This amendment thus represents a clear and significant evolution in the practical application of the PDO protection regime, consistent with European legislation and with the interpretative case law of the Court of Justice on protected designations.
5.2. Protection of the Economic Added Value of the Designation within the European GI System
The third and significant objective of the amendment approved by Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2025/661 consists in the protection and consolidation of the economic added value associated with the Protected Designation of Origin (PDO) ‘Parmigiano Reggiano’. Indeed, within the European legal system, protected designations represent not only legal instruments for the protection of agri-food quality, but also collective intellectual property rights that enable economic operators in the territory to enhance the value of their products on both the internal and international markets, deriving direct benefit from the reputation and authenticity recognised by EU law30.
The Court of Justice of the European Union, in numerous interpretative judgments, has emphasised that the European system of designations of origin does not merely protect a geographical name, but ensures that economic operators enjoy an ‘added value’ directly linked to the certified quality and reputation that the designation has acquired over time among consumers31. This added value constitutes a true collective intangible asset, the protection of which is of great legal and economic significance, as it allows producers adhering to the PDO to benefit from favourable commercial conditions deriving directly from the trust inspired by the protected name in the final consumer.
In the specific case of Parmigiano Reggiano, the amendment to the specification concerning the maximum age of bovines admitted into the supply chain represents a regulatory measure that directly strengthens the protection of the economic value associated with the designation. The introduction of the ten-month age limit for the entry of animals ensures a high level of qualitative uniformity in the final product, minimising the risk that milk not fully compliant with the prescribed requirements is used in certified production. In this way, the new regulatory provision effectively safeguards both the intrinsic quality and the reputation of the designation itself, thereby making a decisive contribution to preserving its economic value on the market.
The European Commission has expressly highlighted, in the text of Implementing Regulation (EU) 2025/661, that the introduction of the age requirement facilitates controls and reduces cases of non-compliance32. In this sense, the provision proves to be functional not only to the protection of product quality, but also to the safeguarding of the reputation of the designation, contributing to the economic stability of the supply chain.
What is thereby achieved is a more effective legal protection of the added value of the PDO, based on legal certainty, productive identity, and consumer trust33.
6. The Opposition Procedure and the European Commission’s Legal Assessment
The non-minor amendment to the product specification of the PDO Parmigiano Reggiano, approved by the European Commission through Implementing Regulation (EU) 2025/661, was the subject of a significant formal opposition raised by Austria. The procedure was carried out in accordance with Articles 49 to 52 of Regulation (EU) No. 1151/2012, which set out in detail the procedural steps for non-minor amendments, including the possibility for Member States or interested parties to submit reasoned objections within the time limit established by the Commission following the publication of the application.
In the present case, the application for amendment to the specification submitted by Italy was published in the Official Journal of the European Union on 9 June 2023. Following this publication, pursuant to Article 51 of Regulation (EU) No. 1151/2012, on 28 August 2023 Austria formally notified the European Commission of a reasoned statement of opposition, arguing that the new age requirement for animals constituted an unjustified restriction on the free movement of goods under Articles 34 and 36 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), as well as under Article 5(1) of Regulation (EU) No. 1151/2012 and Directive (EU) 2015/1535 of the European Parliament and of the Council34.
In its opposition, Austria particularly emphasised that the ten-month time limit imposed for the introduction of bovines exceeded what was strictly necessary to establish and maintain the link with the geographical area, and instead amounted to a disproportionate trade barrier. Such a measure, furthermore, was deemed to be contrary to Article 7(1)(e) of Regulation (EU) No. 1151/2012, which prohibits unjustified restrictions on production or marketing, except where such restrictions are duly justified by the need to safeguard quality, protect origin, or ensure effective control. The opposing Member State also referred to Article 1(2) of Delegated Regulation (EU) No. 664/2014, which provides that any restriction on the origin of raw materials must be strictly justified by the link with the defined geographical area35.
Following the receipt of the reasoned statement of opposition, the European Commission invited the parties—Italy and Austria—to enter into mutual consultations aimed at reaching an agreement, in accordance with Article 51(3) of Regulation (EU) No. 1151/2012. However, despite an additional thirty-day extension granted by the Commission to facilitate the achievement of an agreement, the consultations concluded without a positive outcome, making a final decision by the Commission necessary.
The European Commission, after carefully evaluating the arguments presented by Austria and the responses provided by Italy, decided to reject the opposition in its entirety. This decision was based mainly on three considerations: first, the Commission reaffirmed that PDOs constitute collective intellectual property rights that may be protected by means of proportionate restrictions on the free movement of goods, as expressly provided for in Article 36 TFEU. Secondly, it reiterated that the age requirement introduced by the amendment was objectively justified by the need to ensure the effective adaptation of the animals to the feeding system prescribed in the specification—an essential requirement for the quality and reputation of the product. Lastly, the Commission confirmed that the adopted provision would lead to a concrete simplification of controls, with direct benefits for traceability and the efficiency of inspection activities.
The Commission’s final decision thus appears consistent with the well-established case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union, according to which restrictive measures on the free movement of goods may be regarded as proportionate and legitimate when they are necessary to ensure the quality, origin, and reputation of products protected by geographical indications, provided that such measures are objectively justified, non-discriminatory, and suitable for achieving the stated objectives36.
Ultimately, the rejection of Austria’s opposition and the consequent approval of the amendment to the Parmigiano Reggiano specification clearly reaffirms the priority that the EU legislator assigns to the protection of geographical indications as qualified rights, functional to the effective safeguarding of the quality and reputation of European agri-food products.
7. Conclusions and Future Perspectives
The amendment to the product specification of the PDO Parmigiano Reggiano, approved by Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2025/661, constitutes a significant intervention within the framework of European legislation on geographical indications, and reflects the European Union’s orientation toward a more precise and rigorous protection of traditional agri-food productions. The new provision, which introduces the maximum age limit of ten months for the entry of bovines into the supply chain, addresses specific needs for strengthening the quality, traceability, and territorial identity of the product.
From a legal standpoint, the measure under consideration is particularly relevant for the interpretation and application of the principles governing the relationship between the protection of agri-food quality and the free movement of goods within the European single market. The opposition procedure initiated by Austria and the subsequent assessment carried out by the Commission clearly highlight the need to strike an appropriate balance between competing interests—an approach that is likely to influence future amendment procedures relating to the product specifications of other European PDOs, by fostering greater clarity in application and a general increase in quality and traceability standards.
On an operational level, the implementation of the new requirement will entail a significant organisational and managerial effort for farmers and supply chain operators, particularly in terms of strategic planning and document traceability. These adjustments may result in an initial increase in operating costs, which will be especially burdensome for smaller enterprises. However, in the medium to long term, the introduction of a clearer and more stringent regulatory framework could significantly improve the overall quality of the supply chain and enhance the commercial competitiveness of Parmigiano Reggiano in both domestic and international markets.
Looking ahead, the regulatory path undertaken with this amendment offers interesting insights into the future configuration of the European system of geographical indications. It will therefore be necessary to closely monitor the concrete effects of the amendment, in order to ensure that the strengthening of quality guarantees and traceability does not translate into disproportionate burdens for economic operators, but rather contributes effectively to the sustainable growth and the consolidation of the reputation of the PDO Parmigiano Reggiano.
The full text of the article is published in European Food and Feed Law Review (EFFL), (20) 3/2025.
Author: Francesco Tedioli
Do you want to read the article offline? Save it as a PDF and share it with colleagues
Publications
- Agricultural Law, Commercial Law
- Agricultural Law, Commercial Law
