Feed buyers working with botanical additives have a new European compliance checkpoint. Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2026/1822 entered into force on 16 August 2026, authorising peppermint, wild thyme and sage tinctures as sensory feed additives for all animal species under defined conditions.
The measure is narrow in product scope, but its procurement implications are wider. It demonstrates how the legal status of a familiar botanical material depends not only on its plant name, but also on its preparation, composition, intended species, inclusion level, labelling and handling controls. Buyers should therefore treat a botanical additive as a precisely defined regulated product rather than as a generic herb extract.
Sourced facts: the authorisation is conditional, not unrestricted
The three tinctures are authorised in the category of sensory additives and the functional group of flavouring compounds. The regulation follows their re-evaluation under the EU feed-additive framework and is valid until 16 August 2036.
Each additive must be incorporated into feed through a premixture. Directions for use must state storage conditions and stability under heat treatment. The regulation also establishes species- and category-specific recommended maximum contents in complete feed at 12% moisture.
Those recommended levels differ significantly. For chickens for fattening, for example, the listed levels are 64 mg/kg for peppermint tincture, 71 mg/kg for wild thyme tincture and 35 mg/kg for sage tincture. The respective figures for salmonids and minor fin fish are 289 mg/kg, 322 mg/kg and 156 mg/kg. This makes the target species an essential part of product and formulation verification.
Where the use level stated on a premixture label would exceed the applicable recommended level, the label must identify the functional group, additive identification number, name and added amount of the active substance. Feed businesses must also establish operating procedures and organisational measures addressing user risks. If those measures cannot eliminate the risks, skin, eye and respiratory protective equipment is required.
The authorisation is supported by EFSA scientific opinions. EFSA concluded that the three preparations can be safe for target animals, consumers and the environment under their assessed conditions of use, while identifying skin, eye or respiratory exposure concerns for users. The EU Reference Laboratory also evaluated analytical approaches used to characterise the additives, including combinations of spectrophotometry, gas chromatography and high-performance liquid chromatography for relevant phytochemical markers.
Sourced facts: existing stocks have staged transition periods
The regulation avoids an immediate withdrawal of products made under the previous conditions. Additives and premixtures produced and labelled before 16 February 2027 in accordance with the rules applicable before 16 August 2026 may remain on the market until stocks are exhausted.
For compound feed and feed materials containing the additives, the corresponding production-and-labelling deadline is 16 August 2027 when intended for food-producing animals. For non-food-producing animals, it is 16 August 2028.
These dates do not remove the need for traceability. Operators need records that show when a product was produced and labelled, which rule set applied, its intended animal category and whether it qualifies for the transition. Without that evidence, stock status becomes difficult to defend during a customer review or official control.
Commercial interpretation: turn the regulation into a purchasing control
The regulation does not impose a general new requirement on unrelated protein, oil or plant feed materials. Its practical lesson, however, applies across ingredient procurement: regulatory identity must be checked at the same level of detail as commercial identity.
For any affected botanical additive or premixture, buyers should request the exact additive identification, compositional specification, recommended use by target species, production and labelling dates, storage requirements, heat-stability statement and current label artwork. A supplier declaration should also distinguish newly authorised stock from material relying on transitional provisions.
Compound-feed buyers should review formulations by species rather than accepting one universal inclusion instruction. The lowest applicable recommended level can differ materially between categories, and the additive may also be present through more than one premixture. A formulation-level check can identify unintended cumulative exposure before production.
Procurement and quality teams should also align their records. Purchase orders, specifications, certificates, labels and formulation masters need to describe the same product. A plant name alone is not enough if the authorised preparation has defined dry matter, marker compounds and analytical methods.
Finally, worker-safety requirements should be confirmed before receipt. Handling instructions, closed-transfer arrangements, ventilation and personal protective equipment may affect whether a site can use the material as supplied. Resolving those questions before delivery is more efficient than quarantining stock after arrival.