Tougher rules on packaging gases, sweeteners, colours, preservatives, antioxidants, emulsifiers, gelling agents, and other additives are part of a package of four legislative proposals being put forward by a committee dealing with the environment, health and food safety.
The proposals would require 300 additives already on the market to be re-evaluated for safety.
If passed by the Parliament and then by member states, the four new regulations in the package could serve to increase the cost of doing business.
Yesterday the committee voted unanimously on amendments to a proposed regulation that sets out a common authorisation procedure for additives, enzymes and flavourings.
They also voted on amendments to a second regulation dealing specifically with additives, including packaging gases and other shelf life extenders.
Gases are used in modified atmosphere packaging, a technique used to extend shelf life.
The two proposed regulations would be up for vote before the full Parliament in June or July this year.
The committee is due to consider the other two regulations - one on enzymes, the other on flavourings - on 8 May.
The committee said it made significant amendments to the proposals originally put forward by the European Commission.
The Commission put the package forward in a bid to introduce harmonised EU legislation on food enzymes for the first time and upgrade current rules for flavourings and additives.
The proposals also aim to clarify current legislation and to create a simplified common approval procedure for food additives, flavourings and enzymes, based on scientific opinions from the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA).
The revised package would have to be approved by Parliament's legislators before being passed on to the Council level, where member states governments will consider it for final passage.
However the proposals will face renewed debate at the parliamentary level as views differ on the proposals, admitted committee chair Miroslave Ouzky.
The committee votes on 11 April introduced a range of extra provisions legislators said would make decisions more transparent and improve consumer protection.
"They also took care to safeguard their own role as legislators," said Ouzky.
Any decisions taken by the European Commission and the reasons behind them must be made public, Ouzky said in a statement.
"If a producer's competitive position might be harmed, that producer may be given scientific data protection for five years," he stated.
The regulations would require notification to the Parliament, other interested parties and EFSA of any application for authorisation to place a product on the market.
They would also require all authorisations to be regularly reviewed.
The Commission wanted to avoid having a co-decision procedure in place, claiming it was too cumbersome when regularly updating the approvals lists.
The committee's legislators rejected the proposal and reinstated the principle of co-decision, requiring both Parliament and the European Commission to give the nod to any new product.
An evaluation programme for 300 additives already on the market would be drawn up one year after the regulation enters into force, the committee stated.
Additives currently authorised may stay on the market, but after the reevaluation any additive not on the authorised list would be banned.