Should oats be included as a gluten-containing grain? A look at the Food Allergy Safety, Treatment, Education, and Research Act of 2026 (Faster Act of 2026)

Background Information

There are currently 9 major food allergens included under the Food Allergen Labeling and Consumer Protection Act (FALCPA). Labels must disclose whether the product is or contains an ingredient that includes a major food allergen, namely:

1. Milk
2. Eggs
3. Fish (e.g., bass, flounder, or cod)
4. Crustacean shellfish (e.g., crab, lobster, or shrimp)
5. Tree nuts (e.g., almonds, pecans, or walnuts)
6. Peanuts
7. Wheat
8. Soybeans
9. Sesame

Three bills were recently introduced that attempt to add “gluten-containing grain” to FALCPA. All three bills define rye and barley as “gluten-containing grain.” One bill goes further by also including oats in the definition.

In April, H.R. 9048 –The Celiac Safety Act of 2026– was introduced to the House of Representatives. This proposed law adds “gluten-containing grain” in the definition of major food allergen. Gluten-containing grain under this bill is defined as wheat, rye, barley, and crossbred hybrids. (Note: This bill keeps wheat on the current list of major food allergens–adding gluten-containing grain versus replacing wheat with gluten-containing grain). Gluten Free Watchdog (GFWD) supports the Celiac Safety Act.

Also in April, H.R. 8385 –The Food Labeling Modernization Act (FLMA) of 2026– was reintroduced to the House of Representatives. This bill proposes that “gluten-containing grain” (defined as wheat, rye, barley, and crossbred hybrids) be included under FALCPA. The bill does not add gluten-containing grain to the list of major food allergens. It adds gluten-containing grain to labeling requirements applicable to the major food allergens. Gluten Free Watchdog has supported the FLMA since 2021, when GFWD worked on the bill to add gluten-containing grain under FALCPA.

In late July, H.R. 9988 –The FASTER Act of 2026– was introduced into the House of Representatives “To amend the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act to include barley, rye, and oats as major food allergens.” Among other things, this bill would replace “wheat” under FALCPA with “gluten-containing grain.” Notably, this bill defines gluten-containing grain as wheat, barley, rye, and oats or crossbred hybrids of these grains.

This post deals specifically with H.R. 9988’s attempt to add oats to the list of major food allergens by including it in the definition of “gluten-containing grain.”

Questions You May Have:

If the FASTER Act of 2026 passes what does this mean?

The food category “gluten-containing grain” would be added to the list of major food allergens under FALCPA. Because oats are included in the FASTER Act’s definition of “gluten-containing grain,” they would have to be declared in the ingredients list or in a separate Contains statement. While wheat would no longer be separately listed as a major food allergen, it would remain regulated under the “gluten-containing grain” definition.

Note: Please don’t be alarmed thinking that there are numerous ingredients that contain oats hidden in ingredients lists. The vast majority of oat ingredients used in food are already declared.

How is gluten-containing grain defined under the FASTER Act of 2026?

The term ‘gluten-containing grain’ means one of the following grains, or a crossbred hybrid of such grains, such as triticale:

“(1) Wheat, including any species in the genus Triticum.

“(2) Rye, including any species in the genus Secale.

“(3) Barley, including any species in the genus Hordeum.

“(4) Oats, including any species in the genus Avena sativa.”

Note: Number 4 above appears to be an editing error in the bill. Avena is the genus. Sativa is the species. 

Note: There has been some concern expressed on social media that “gluten containing grain” would be declared as the allergen under FALCPA, not the individual grains. Currently, categories or “food groups” of major allergens, such as tree nuts and Crustacean shellfish must be declared by their specific name (e.g., cashew, crab). The intent of H.R. 9988 appears to require the naming of each specific grain, but Congress may want to include in this bill a conforming sentence in the appropriate place that reads, “gluten-containing grain (i.e., wheat, barley, rye, oats, and their crossbred varieties)”. You can see examples of this in section 203 (c) Conforming Amendments in the text of FALCPA.

How is gluten-containing grain defined under FDA’s gluten-free labeling rule?

A “gluten-containing grain” under the gluten-free labeling rule is defined as any one of the following grains or their crossbred hybrids (e.g., triticale, which is a cross between wheat and rye):

(i) Wheat, including any species belonging to the genus Triticum;

(ii) Rye, including any species belonging to the genus Secale; or

(iii) Barley, including any species belonging to the genus Hordeum.

If oats are included as a gluten-containing grain under FALCPA, what impact will this have on the gluten-free labeling rule?

The FASTER Act does not include any language on revising the gluten-free labeling rule.

If the FDA’s gluten-free labeling rule and the FASTER Act of 2026 have different definitions of gluten-containing grain, what is the practical implication?

The United States would have two different definitions of gluten-containing grain. One definition would be under the FASTER Act of 2026–a statutory law mandated by Congress. The other would be under the gluten-free labeling rule–a regulatory rule developed by the FDA (although mandated under FALCPA).

The gluten-free labeling rule regulates claims of “gluten-free” on the package. FALCPA regulates the mandatory labeling of major food allergens, regardless of gluten-free claims also on the package. If the FASTER Act passes, a product with oats declared on the package can be labeled “gluten-free” under the gluten-free labeling rule–the same as it is today. Regardless, having two different definitions of gluten-containing grains could be confusing to consumers and manufacturers.

Can the FDA simply add oats to the definition of gluten-containing grain in the gluten-free labeling rule?

Not easily and not without changing the entire framework of the rule. In other words, you can’t really get there from here. Changing rules can take years—the gluten-free labeling rule itself came into existence as a “final rule” in 2013, following a congressional directive in FALCPA (2004) to FDA to create the rule.

Under the FDA’s gluten-free labeling rule, “gluten” refers to the proteins that occur naturally in gluten-containing grains. Ingredients derived from gluten-containing grains, and that have been processed to remove gluten can be included in labeled gluten-free foods. BUT the example provided by the FDA in the codified rule is wheat starch—meaning the wheat grain has been processed to remove naturally occurring gluten. Unavoidable gluten (as may occur in oats via cross contact with wheat, barley, and rye) is treated separately.

The gluten-free labeling rule:

The term “gluten” means the proteins that naturally occur in a gluten-containing grain and that may cause adverse health effects in persons with celiac disease (e.g., prolamins and glutelins).

(3) The labeling claim “gluten-free” means:

(i) That the food bearing the claim in its labeling:

(A) Does not contain any one of the following:

(1) An ingredient that is a gluten-containing grain (e.g., spelt wheat);

(2) An ingredient that is derived from a gluten-containing grain and that has not been processed to remove gluten (e.g., wheat flour); or

(3) An ingredient that is derived from a gluten-containing grain and that has been processed to remove gluten (e.g., wheat starch), if the use of that ingredient results in the presence of 20 parts per million (ppm) or more gluten in the food (i.e., 20 milligrams (mg) or more gluten per kilogram (kg) of food); or

(B) Inherently does not contain gluten; and

(ii) Any unavoidable presence of gluten in the food bearing the claim in its labeling is below 20 ppm gluten (i.e., below 20 mg gluten per kg of food).

I keep reading that other countries include oats in their rule, so why is it so hard to do the same in the U.S.?

It’s not that simple. Different countries have different regulatory frameworks. For example, in the EU and UK, cereals containing gluten are included under allergens. Oats are considered a cereal containing gluten. BUT in the EU/UK, gluten-free foods may be made from ingredients that contain gluten if they have been produced, prepared, and/or processed to reduce gluten content and contain no more than 20 ppm of gluten. Oats are specifically called out as needing to be specially produced, prepared, and/or processed to avoid contamination with wheat, rye, and barley at levels above 20 ppm.

Note: The above is precisely the reason ingredients such as malt vinegar and malt extract may be included in foods labeled gluten-free in the UK/EU. These ingredients are not allowed in the US because by definition they contain barley protein and they have not been processed to remove gluten.

In Canada, in terms of grains that contain gluten, only wheat (and triticale—a cross between wheat and rye) is listed as a major allergen. BUT “gluten sources” are included in a separate section. Gluten sources include oats. A food can’t be labeled gluten-free if it contains any gluten protein or modified gluten protein, including any gluten protein fraction. Canada carved out a specific exemption for oats under Health Canada’s Marketing Authorization provision to allow “gluten-free oats” to be included in labeled gluten-free foods.

Note: The FDA does not have a similar marketing authorization provision.

Where does Gluten Free Watchdog stand on the Faster Act of 2026 specifically as it concerns adding oats to the definition of gluten-containing grain?

Because oats do not inherently contain gluten, Gluten Free Watchdog is opposed to including them under the category “gluten-containing grain.”

Regardless, oats do have a huge cross-contact problem that must be addressed. This problem is best solved by the FDA taking an immediate clear stand on gluten cross contact in oats by issuing guidance on best practices for sampling and testing of oats labeled gluten-free. This could be done under the existing FAQs on the gluten-free labeling rule. The FDA must increase their surveillance and testing of single ingredient labeled gluten-free oats, and when oats are found to test out of compliance, the FDA must enforce the gluten-free labeling rule via a recall. And for all packages not labeled gluten-free and containing oats, the FDA must require a standard statement that oats are highly likely to contain errant gluten-containing grains.

Bottom Line

Gluten Free Watchdog supports all legislative and regulatory efforts that add rye and barley to FALCPA, in addition to a robust effort by the FDA to issue guidance on the best practices for minimizing cross-contact in oats, and on sampling to verify oats labeled gluten-free contain less than 20 ppm of gluten.

A second bottom line to help clarify where Gluten Free Watchdog stands on oats and the FASTER Act of 2026 because a few people have asked…

There are two separate questions to consider:

Do oats carry a serious risk of gluten cross-contact? Yes. This is well documented, including in GFWD’s own testing. Cross-contact must be addressed by the FDA.

Do oats inherently contain gluten the way wheat, barley, and rye do? No. Oats are naturally gluten-free. When gluten from wheat, barley, or rye is found in oats, it is due to cross-contact, not because gluten is part of the grain.

We strongly support informing consumers about oats. In fact, we’ve called for a mandatory statement on oat-containing products that are not labeled gluten-free. Why? To alert consumers that oats not labeled gluten-free are highly likely to contain errant gluten-containing grains through cross-contact. What we don’t support is defining oats themselves as an inherently “gluten-containing grain,” because that suggests gluten is part of their intrinsic make-up. This is not accurate.

We support adding barley and rye under FALCPA, and a serious FDA effort to address gluten cross-contact in oats. This has been our consistent position.