While legislators and industry debate whether states should be able to enforce their own food additive bans, and as the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) receives criticism for its lax oversight of food chemical safety, Aldi has announced it will proactively eliminate 44 “artificial” ingredients from its private-label food portfolio by end-2027.

Aldia Gives Suppliers 20 Months to Reformulate

The 44 soon-to-be-banned additives build on Aldi’s decision to remove 13 synthetic colorants from its portfolio in 2015—ten years before FDA began its efforts to convince industry to voluntarily ditch artificial food dyes—bringing the total of restricted substances to 57.

Aldi’s decision also applies to its vitamin and supplement products. The prohibited substances will neither be allowed as standalone ingredients nor as part of composite ingredients.

Reformulated products will begin rolling out now through December 2027. The end-2027 goal will give Aldi’s suppliers time to adapt, according to the company. Aldi says it is working closely with supplier partners on the quality of reformulated goods.

Ingredients Aldi has already removed from its private-label portfolio are: brominated vegetable oil (BVO), blue 1, blue 2, green 3, red 2, red 3, red 40, yellow 5, yellow 6, monosodium glutamate (MSG), orange B, partially hydrogenated oils (PHOs), and synthetic trans fatty acids.

The 44 substances Aldi will be phasing out of its products moving forward include, but are not limited to: acesulfame K, butylated hydroxyanisole (BHA), butylated hydroxytoluene (BHT), calcium bromate, lye, phthalates, potassium bromate, propylparaben, talc, and titanium dioxide. The full list can be found here.

Stakeholders Argue FDA is Not Doing Enough to Get Harmful Ingredients Out of Food Supply

Since U.S. Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and FDA announced their plan to work with industry to facilitate a voluntary phase-out of synthetic food dyes from the U.S. food supply in April 2025, several companies have announced commitments to do so, including Walmart, Nestlé USA, and Kraft Heinz, among others.

In the year following the announcement, FDA has approved certain “natural” colors for food use, added several dyes to its list of chemicals prioritized for post-market safety reassessment, revoked the authorization for orange B, expanded the allowed uses of the label claim “no artificial colors” to include naturally derived colorants, and provided guidance for industry on phasing out synthetic food dyes. In the absence of statutory rulemaking, however, these efforts still rely on industry to voluntarily reformulate their products.

Consumer Reports, which has been at the forefront of the grassroots movement for a safer food supply free of potentially harmful chemicals, recently criticized FDA’s voluntary approach as not doing enough. According to the group, major companies like Coca-Cola, Mondelez, and Unilever have not made any commitments to reformulate their products in line with FDA’s (and many consumers’) wishes.

In a national survey of more than 2,000 adults conducted by Consumer Reports in March 2026, 72 percent of consumers reported being concerned about synthetic dyes in foods and 66 percent said companies should be required to stop using them.

Beyond Dyes: GRAS Ingredients and States’ Right to Enforce Bans

Consumers and legislators have expressed concerns about other food ingredients beyond synthetic colorants, including those Aldi is choosing to prohibit from its products, due to some evidence of their potential health harms, their prohibition in other jurisdictions like the EU and Canada, or their entry into the food supply through the controversial “Generally Recognized as Safe” (GRAS) pathway.

Originally established to allow commonly used ingredients like vinegar or yeast to remain in the food supply without extensive review, GRAS enables companies to self-determine the safety of substances used in their products without direct FDA oversight. Although companies must provide the same safety information to make a GRAS determination as would be required for an FDA food additive authorization, critics of GRAS question the possible bias of safety evidence sourced by industry and point to the hundreds of chemicals, many of which are synthetic or new without an extensive history of safe use, that have been allowed in the U.S. food supply via GRAS.

Although FDA has initiated rulemaking that would supposedly tighten the GRAS “loophole” (pending White House review since late 2025), several states have taken the initiative to ban chemical ingredients or set rules for GRAS determinations, citing federal inaction. For example, the precedent-setting California Food Safety Act was passed in 2023 and bans four additives on Aldi’s list, and the New York legislature passed the Food Safety and Chemical Disclosure Act in April 2026, which would ban three substances and require GRAS disclosures.

Responding to this emerging patchwork of state legislation, industry lobbyists, such as the Americans for Ingredient Transparency (AFIT), have gone to work trying to advance federal bills—like the draft FRESH Act—that would preempt state GRAS laws, labeling requirements, and ingredient bans. Proponents of federal preemption argue that compliance with different state laws would increase costs for food companies, which would result in rising prices for the consumer. Conversely, opponents say states have been key to protecting public health while FDA oversight has been ineffective.

Amid this debate and uncertainty, however, some companies like Aldi have chosen to get ahead of shifting regulations and respond to consumer demands by initiating proactive ingredient bans.

(For expert insight into how food companies can prepare for state and federal policy changes regarding food dyes, GRAS ingredients, and ultra-processed foods, listen to Episode 207 of the Food Safety Matters podcast with a leader in the food regulatory legal space, Brian Sylvester, J.D., here).