Best-before and use-by are two different things
The best-before date is defined in the Food Information Regulation: it is the date until which a food retains its specific properties when properly stored (Art. 2(2)(r) Regulation (EU) No 1169/2011, FIC). It is the producer's quality promise for taste, colour, texture, nutritional values or flowability — not a statement that the goods become unsafe afterwards.
The use-by date (“use by”) is carried only by foods which, from a microbiological point of view, are highly perishable and are therefore likely after a short period to constitute an immediate danger to human health. After the use-by date, a food is deemed to be unsafe within the meaning of Art. 14 Regulation (EC) No 178/2002 (Art. 24(1) FIC). That is the hard limit, and it mainly concerns fresh meat, fresh fish and many fresh dairy products.
Raw materials almost always carry a best-before date, not a use-by date: flours, starches, sugar and syrup products, oils, milk and protein powders, concentrates, flavourings, frozen goods. Some foods need no best-before date at all under Annex X of the FIC, among them cooking salt, sugar in solid form, vinegar and fresh fruit and vegetables that have not been peeled, cut or similarly treated.
| Best-before date (BBD) | Use-by date | |
|---|---|---|
| Wording | “best before …” | “use by …” |
| Legal basis | Art. 2(2)(r) and Annex X FIC | Art. 24 FIC in conjunction with Art. 14 Regulation (EC) No 178/2002 |
| What it says | Quality: the guaranteed properties are retained until then if stored correctly. | Safety: the food is highly perishable from a microbiological point of view. |
| After the date | Supply remains permitted if the goods are safe and sound. Responsibility lies with whoever supplies them. | Goods are deemed unsafe. Supply as food is not permitted. |
| Typical raw materials | Dry goods, powders, oils, concentrates, frozen goods | Fresh meat, fresh fish, many fresh dairy products |
Who carries responsibility once the best-before date has passed
The General Food Law Regulation prohibits placing food on the market that is not safe. Not safe means injurious to health or unfit for human consumption, for instance through contamination, putrefaction, deterioration or decay (Art. 14 Regulation (EC) No 178/2002). The food business operator is responsible for compliance at every stage at which it controls the goods (Art. 17).
Up to the best-before date, the producer guarantees the properties. After that, whoever supplies the goods carries out the assessment themselves — the producer if the batch is still in its warehouse, the trader if they resell it, the processor if they use it. This is not a formality: whoever supplies a batch that is unfit for consumption is liable for it, regardless of what the label says.
In practice, assessment means: a sensory check (appearance, smell, taste, texture), the documented storage history with temperature and humidity, and — for anything that changes measurably — a current analysis: oxidation values for oils and fats, moisture and caking for powders, microbiology for sensitive products. A retained sample of the batch makes this assessment considerably easier.
Marketable in B2B: what applies to a resale
There is no special regime for sales between businesses. Food law applies regardless of whether the goods are supplied to consumers or to a processor. On top of that comes sales law: a best-before date that has already passed and is concealed is a defect in the goods and, in case of doubt, a deception. The buyer must know what they are buying, and they must be able to decide for themselves whether they may still use the goods as food.
Four points decide whether a resale is clean:
- State it openly. A best-before date that has passed or is about to pass belongs in the offer, on the delivery note and on the invoice — with the date per batch, not as a blanket statement.
- Do not overlabel. The best-before date on the packaging may be neither changed, covered over nor reissued. That would be misleading information under Art. 7 FIC. A note “best-before date exceeded” is permitted; redating is not.
- Agree the use. Whether the goods will be processed, resold as food or used as feed should be set out in the contract. A processor who uses the goods immediately sets the shelf life of their end product on their own responsibility, based on their own checks.
- Document the condition. A current analysis, the storage history, photos and a sample do not relieve the buyer of the assessment, but they make it possible. A quality agreement based on a sample protects both sides.
In retail sales to consumers it is common practice to mark an exceeded best-before date clearly — not least because of the prohibition on misleading information. For raw materials in bulk packaging, the statement on the delivery note and in the contract is what counts.
When feed is the more sensible route
Not every batch past its best-before date still belongs in the food channel. The feed route is the better one when the assessment as food remains uncertain, when the remaining shelf life is too short for any processor, when the goods have already been unpacked or opened, or when labelled branded goods should not reappear on the market.
Legally this is a route in its own right: food that is no longer intended for human consumption counts as “former foodstuffs” in the Catalogue of feed materials (Regulation (EU) No 68/2013). The condition is that it was manufactured in compliance with food law and that feeding it poses no health risk. Packaging residues, spoiled goods and catering waste from kitchens and food service are excluded. Whoever places such goods on the market as feed themselves becomes a feed business operator for that activity and must be registered under Regulation (EC) No 183/2005; whoever supplies them as food to a registered feed business operator who reassigns them does not.
Economically, the revenue in the feed channel sits below that of the food channel but above the cost of disposal. And it is more predictable, because a feed mill buys by nutritional value, not by remaining shelf life. What matters is the timing of the decision: with every week of remaining shelf life, the circle of food buyers shrinks. A batch that still finds a processor today is a feed lot in a few weeks.
What this means for raw materials rather than finished products
For raw materials in bulk packaging, the analysis counts more than the date. A processor buying milk powder, starch, oil or a concentrate assesses the goods against its own specification — with current measured values. Many dry raw materials remain technically sound well beyond the best-before date; others change measurably: oils and fat-containing powders oxidise, flavourings lose intensity, vitamins degrade, hygroscopic powders absorb moisture and cake.
Whoever presents an analysis taken after the best-before date has passed has practically answered the assessment question for the buyer. If there is none, a sample replaces the paperwork: the buyer checks the sensory attributes and has the goods analysed if necessary. That costs a few days but creates clarity on both sides.
Finished products with labels are the harder case. Brand, country and language tie the goods to one market, retailers demand minimum remaining shelf life on delivery, and the producer does not want to see its brand on the shelf with an expired date. Here the route often runs through processing — the goods are unpacked and used as a raw material — or through the feed channel. Goods with a use-by date fall under the animal by-products regime once that date has passed (Regulation (EC) No 1069/2009); that is a very narrow framework and a case for specialised processors.