“Shrinkflation” has become one of the most visible consumer protection issues in the retail sector in recent years. The practice refers to situations where the quantity of a product decreases while its price remains the same — or even increases — often without consumers immediately noticing the change.
Against a backdrop of inflationary pressure and increasing scrutiny of retail transparency, both France and Austria have recently introduced specific legal measures aimed at tackling this practice. While both jurisdictions pursue the same objective — ensuring that consumers are properly informed when product quantities are reduced — the regulatory approaches adopted differ in several important respects.
France: mandatory consumer information since July 2024
In France, retailers have been subject to new transparency obligations since 1 July 2024. Under the French regime, consumers must be informed when a product’s quantity has decreased while the price per unit has increased.
The legislation requires retailers to display a specific notice directly on the product, on the shelf, or in the immediate vicinity of the product. The notice must indicate:
“For this product, the quantity sold has changed from X to Y (weight or volume)/units, and its price per [relevant unit] has increased by …% or …€.”
The French authorities, including the DGCCRF, may impose administrative sanctions and may also rely on injunction powers and public disclosure mechanisms in cases of non-compliance.
Austria: the new “Anti-Mogelpackungs-Gesetz”
Austria followed with its own legislation through the so-called “Anti-Mogelpackungs-Gesetz” (Act against misleading packaging), which entered into force on 1 April 2026.
The Austrian law requires retailers to clearly indicate when the net quantity of a product has been reduced and when the product presentation may mislead consumers into believing that the quantity has remained unchanged.
Unlike the French model, Austria adopts a shorter and more direct warning format:
“Warning: reduced content – higher price.”
The Austrian regime also contains a broader scope in some respects, as it applies not only to large food retailers but also to food and drugstore retailers belonging to chains with at least five outlets, regardless of store size.
Key similarities between the two systems
Despite the differences in wording and enforcement mechanisms, the two regimes share several core features. Both apply primarily to food-focused retailers with sales areas of at least 400 m² and concern pre-packaged fast-moving consumer goods subject to unit price display obligations.
The obligations are triggered when two cumulative conditions are met:
- the quantity of the product decreases; and
- the unit price increases.
Both countries also exclude e-commerce from the scope of these rules.
In addition, both legal frameworks place primary responsibility on retailers for ensuring compliance, although suppliers are expected to inform retailers sufficiently in advance about changes to products, including changes in quantity or composition.
Sanctions and enforcement
The sanction mechanisms differ between the two jurisdictions.
In France, breaches may result in administrative fines of up to €3,000 for natural persons and €15,000 for legal entities.
Austria, meanwhile, provides for fines of up to EUR 2,500 per product, with a maximum of EUR 10,000, increasing in cases of repeated infringements.
Before sanctions are imposed, retailers must first be formally requested to comply with the law.
Importantly, Austrian retailers may avoid sanctions if they can demonstrate that suppliers failed to inform them of the quantity reduction.
Practical implications for suppliers and retailers
These new rules highlight the growing regulatory focus on consumer transparency in the FMCG sector across Europe. They also demonstrate how national legislators are increasingly willing to intervene in pricing and packaging practices that may affect consumer perception.
From a practical perspective, compliance will require close coordination between suppliers and retailers. As highlighted in the presentation, businesses should ensure that contractual arrangements clearly address notification obligations, implementation responsibilities, and liability allocation in relation to product changes and shrinkflation-related disclosures.
For companies operating across multiple European jurisdictions, these developments also reinforce the importance of monitoring diverging national approaches to consumer protection and retail transparency — particularly as similar initiatives may emerge elsewhere in the EU in the coming years.
Article by bpv HÜGEL and Loi & Stratégies
