An article supported by PGRIP has been published in New Phytologist, written by nine co-authors from Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Canada, Chile, the Netherlands, Sweden and the USA. It is demonstrated in the article that the approach of the EU to directed mutagenesis deviates from many of the other countries included in the study, and the potential consequences are discussed. A special regulatory regime applies in most countries to products of recombinant nucleic acid modifications. A ruling from the European Court of Justice has interpreted this regulatory regime in a way that it also applies to emerging mutagenesis techniques. Elsewhere regulatory progress is also ongoing. In 2015, Argentina launched a regulatory framework, followed by Chile in 2017 and recently Brazil and Colombia. In March 2018, the USDA announced that it will not regulate genome‐edited plants differently if they could have also been developed through traditional breeding. Canada has an altogether different approach with their Plants with Novel Traits regulations. Australia is currently reviewing its Gene Technology Act. You can read the article here.