India’s food safety regulator has widened its scrutiny of the country’s spirits industry by inspecting a Pernod Ricard manufacturing facility in Bengaluru and collecting samples of popular whisky brands. The two day inspection, according to sources familiar with the matter, involved testing liquor samples, reviewing documentation and examining production and packaging practices. No adverse finding against Pernod Ricard had been issued at the time of the reported inspection, making the episode an investigation rather than evidence of wrongdoing by the company.

The inspection is nevertheless significant because it follows a series of increasingly assertive actions by the Food Safety and Standards Authority of India against major alcohol manufacturers. The regulator has recently examined questions involving flavouring, labelling, packaging and product standards, including action against products associated with Diageo and other companies. The wider pattern suggests that India’s food safety authorities are moving toward closer scrutiny of an industry that has traditionally operated under a complicated combination of national food standards and state level alcohol regulations.

The focus on Pernod Ricard also matters because the company has a substantial position in India’s whisky market. Its portfolio includes Royal Stag and Blenders Pride, two widely recognised brands, alongside international spirits. Any regulatory examination involving such products therefore has implications beyond one manufacturing facility, particularly if laboratory testing leads to further questions about product composition or labelling.

The Inspection Is About Compliance, Not Yet A Finding

The reported inspection should be distinguished carefully from the enforcement action already taken against some other alcohol manufacturers. Officials reportedly collected samples from brands including Blenders Pride and Royal Stag and requested documents from the Bengaluru facility. Sources also said the company was advised to improve hygiene practices and correct markings relating to the use of recycled plastic on bottles, but they did not report an adverse finding against the products themselves.

That distinction is important because regulatory inspections routinely examine whether manufacturing processes, packaging, records and finished products comply with applicable standards. The collection of samples does not establish that a product is unsafe or incorrectly manufactured. Laboratory analysis and subsequent regulatory decisions are required before such conclusions can be reached.

Pernod Ricard has confirmed that food safety officials visited its facility and described regulatory inspections as an established part of industry compliance. The company has also maintained that it follows robust quality and safety standards. Until the regulator publishes test results or announces further action, the most defensible interpretation is that Pernod has come under heightened scrutiny rather than that its products have been found to violate food safety rules.

The inspection does, however, provide an indication of how the regulatory environment is changing. FSSAI’s current framework includes specific standards for alcoholic beverages as well as separate requirements concerning food safety, packaging and labelling. Whisky is therefore subject to defined requirements relating to composition, alcohol strength, permitted ingredients and other characteristics, giving regulators a basis for examining both manufacturing processes and claims made on product labels.

Diageo Case Has Changed The Industry’s Risk Calculation

The Pernod inspection comes after a much more consequential regulatory action involving Diageo’s Indian business, United Spirits. Earlier this month, FSSAI restricted the sale of several whisky and rum products after raising concerns about the use of artificial or nature identical flavouring and questions surrounding product standards. The action affected well known brands and triggered a broader debate about how flavouring can be used in Indian spirits.

The dispute is important because it illustrates the difference between commercial practice and regulatory interpretation. Alcohol manufacturers may formulate products according to processes that have been used commercially for years, while regulators can still determine that particular ingredients, descriptions or manufacturing methods do not comply with the applicable food standards. The resulting disagreement can become significant even when a company maintains that its products meet existing legal requirements.

Diageo has challenged aspects of the regulatory action and has argued that its products comply with applicable labelling and manufacturing requirements. The company has also moved toward reformulating some products in an effort to resolve restrictions in certain markets. The episode has consequently become a warning for the broader industry that established formulations cannot necessarily be assumed to remain acceptable if regulatory interpretation changes or enforcement becomes more rigorous.

The regulator’s subsequent inspection of Pernod Ricard therefore appears significant primarily because it indicates that scrutiny may not be confined to one company. If samples from different manufacturers are tested against the same standards, the authorities can establish whether disputed practices are isolated incidents or reflect broader industry conventions. That could make the current regulatory campaign considerably more consequential for India’s spirits producers.

Packaging And Hygiene Are Becoming Regulatory Issues

The inspection also reportedly involved hygiene and packaging practices, demonstrating that the regulatory concern extends beyond what is inside the bottle. This is particularly relevant because FSSAI has increasingly emphasised compliance across the entire food production chain, including manufacturing conditions, storage, packaging and labelling.

The reported concern over markings related to recycled plastic is notable because packaging standards can become a regulatory issue even when the liquid product itself is not considered unsafe. Companies increasingly use recycled materials as part of sustainability programmes, but regulators still require appropriate identification and compliance with standards governing materials that come into contact with food or beverages.

The Diageo case has already highlighted how packaging can become an enforcement issue. During an inspection of a United Spirits facility in Bengaluru, authorities reportedly seized approximately 18,000 boxes of liquor bottles over concerns that certain plastic containers lacked required markings indicating the use of safe recycled material. Diageo disputed the implication that the packaging represented a safety risk and said the bottles came from approved recyclers and had undergone required testing.

The broader lesson is that multinational spirits companies operating in India now face a compliance environment in which seemingly technical details can have commercial consequences. A missing marking, disputed ingredient or inconsistent label can potentially lead to product holds, reformulation requirements or restrictions in individual markets. Companies therefore have an incentive to treat regulatory documentation and packaging controls with the same importance as the quality of the finished spirit.

India’s Expanding Spirits Market Faces Higher Scrutiny

India’s alcohol industry is large, rapidly evolving and increasingly attractive to multinational companies. Rising disposable incomes, premiumisation and the growing popularity of branded spirits have encouraged international producers to invest heavily in the country. Pernod Ricard has established a particularly extensive presence, with a portfolio spanning mass market whisky, premium Indian brands and internationally recognised spirits.

That growth makes regulatory certainty increasingly important. Companies investing in manufacturing capacity and premium brands need predictable rules governing ingredients, labelling and production. At the same time, consumers need confidence that products sold under familiar brands comply consistently with safety and quality standards.

The current crackdown could ultimately strengthen that confidence if it produces clearer and more consistently enforced standards. A regulator that examines products across companies can help create a level playing field by preventing manufacturers from gaining commercial advantages through practices that competitors may consider unacceptable or that regulators later determine violate the rules.

There is also a legitimate reason for greater scrutiny of alcoholic beverages because consumers generally have limited ability to assess the composition of a finished spirit themselves. Unlike many packaged foods, the quality and identity of a distilled beverage cannot easily be verified by ordinary consumers through appearance or taste. That makes accurate labelling, manufacturing controls and regulatory testing particularly important.

For Pernod Ricard, the immediate issue is therefore not whether its brands have been found to be in violation. They have not, based on the information currently available. The more important development is that the company has entered a regulatory environment in which major spirits producers are being examined more closely and where product formulations, packaging and manufacturing practices are all receiving greater attention.

The eventual laboratory results from the collected samples will determine whether the inspection leads to further action. If no significant issues are identified, the episode may remain a routine compliance exercise conducted during a period of unusually intense industry scrutiny. If problems are found, however, the consequences could extend beyond Pernod Ricard and prompt a much broader examination of how India’s whisky industry formulates, labels and packages its products.

That makes the current inspection an important test of the regulator’s wider approach. The central question is no longer simply whether one company has complied with the rules, but whether India’s rapidly expanding spirits industry can adapt to a regulatory system that is becoming more detailed, more interventionist and increasingly focused on consistency across manufacturers.

(Adapted from Reuters.com)