Overview of The shocking investigation into food labels
ABC News Daily interviews investigative reporter Adele Ferguson about a Four Corners investigation that tested whether common supermarket and food-service products in Australia were actually what their labels claimed. Using forensic trace element analysis with Source Certain, the investigation found multiple cases of apparent food fraud across tomatoes, eggs, seafood, and turmeric — raising serious questions about food authenticity, trust, and weak enforcement around origin claims.
Key findings from the investigation
Tomato products
- More than 200 tomato products across 39 brands were tested.
- Roughly one in four tomato paste or passata products either failed or required further investigation.
- Leggo’s was the most striking case:
- 33 tomato paste products were tested.
- 27 failed — about 80%.
- Its passata and diced tomatoes passed, but the paste products were problematic.
- Other products that failed included:
- Rosso Gagano Passata sold at Coles, labelled Italian but traced to China
- Coles Italian tomato paste, which also failed
- Aldi Renmano tomato paste, which also failed
Eggs
- More than 20 egg brands were tested across multiple states and retail sites.
- Most passed, but:
- One South Australian brand failed repeatedly.
- Woolworths home-brand eggs were found to contain caged eggs despite being labelled as cage-free/free-range.
Seafood
- Seafood origin labelling is mandatory in supermarkets, and now also in food service settings.
- The investigation tested 19 samples of frozen farmed prawns and white fish from major food-service distributors.
- Findings included:
- One Australian-labelled prawn product that failed origin testing
- White fish samples that were largely inconsistent with their claims
- Around 40–45% of the white fish samples did not verify and were traced to Vietnam
Turmeric
- 11 brands and 28 turmeric products from 14 stores were tested.
- Three brands failed:
- Hoyts: detected with a lead yellow pigment used in paint/plastics, which is not allowed in Australia
- Gourmet Organic Turmeric: found to be bulked with a cheaper starchy plant ingredient
- Simply Organic: also found not to be pure turmeric
How the testing worked
- Source Certain used trace element analysis, treating food like it has a chemical “fingerprint.”
- Because plants absorb elements from soil, water, and climate, scientists can compare those signatures with a database of verified samples.
- The process measured more than 70 elements to determine whether a product’s claimed origin matched its actual profile.
- The method has been used by governments and agencies globally and is described as highly credible.
Company responses
- Simplot (owner of Leggo’s):
- Declined an interview
- Said it remained confident its Australian-grown claims are accurate
- Pointed to supplier traceability and documentation
- Said it had not done forensic testing
- Coles:
- Rejected the tomato test results
- Said there was no evidence its Italian tomato paste came from China
- Aldi:
- Rejected the claims and said it trusts its suppliers
- Rosso Gagano importer:
- Rejected the findings and said it had detailed traceability data
- Woolworths:
- Rejected the egg findings
- Said product integrity and compliance are taken seriously
- Hoyts:
- Said it would investigate further and believed any metals were at safe levels
- Gourmet Organic:
- Said it was commissioning its own testing
- Argued some extra plant matter can be normal in milled spices
- Simply Organic:
- Did not respond
Bigger issue: Australia’s food fraud regulatory gap
- Australia has strong food safety regulation, but the system is not designed to detect food fraud well.
- Responsibility is fragmented across several bodies:
- Food Standards Australia New Zealand (FSANZ) sets rules but is not a regulator
- State and local authorities enforce many rules
- The Department of Agriculture checks some imports
- The ACCC can act on misleading claims
- Experts say there is no single regulator clearly tasked with detecting origin misrepresentation or adulteration.
- The investigation argues this creates major gaps and opportunities for deception.
Main takeaways
- Food fraud appears to be a real and widespread risk in Australian supply chains.
- Origin claims on packaging cannot always be assumed to be true.
- The current system relies too heavily on paperwork and supplier trust rather than independent testing.
- Experts interviewed for the report argue Australia urgently needs:
- A dedicated food fraud regulator
- More authenticity testing
- Stronger, more coordinated enforcement
Why it matters
This investigation suggests consumers may be paying premium prices for products that are not what they claim to be — whether for ethical reasons, health reasons, or simply to support local or imported goods they trust. The report’s central message is that food fraud is a breach of trust, and Australia’s regulatory system is not built strongly enough to stop it.