When cheaper eggs come at a higher cost, surely it’s time for a counter offensive?

Published on : 20 Nov 2025

Anyone remember an article in this very publication back in July this year? Just to refresh those who may be struggling to recall, it was entitled “The great European egg offensive” and it focused mainly on two areas, firstly there was the rise in interest from EU based processors to enter the UK market, and secondly the increase in imported egg numbers and how this had the potential to grow.

Now, nobody needs an “I told you so” follow up to that article, but the situation has certainly not eased back, in fact the polar opposite is true, and that certainly justifies an update to look a little deeper into the Who, What, Where, When and Why. There are no apologies made for what may in places seem like repetition, it seems important enough to state some of this again.

Firstly, lets update on the numbers, in short, they are stark, and they're getting starker. Shell egg imports into the UK surged by over 300% in August 2025 when compared to the previous year. That's not a typo!! In the first half of 2025 alone, imports jumped 39% on the same period in 2024. Ukraine and Poland now occupying the top slots as the UK's largest egg suppliers, with Ukraine shipping around 8 million kilograms and Poland close behind at 7 million kilograms.

You could view those numbers as simply black and white statistics, or you could argue that they represent a fundamental shift in where the UK now sources its eggs. But it’s not just place of origin that’s the concern here, it’s the shift in the standards under which those eggs are being produced. Because here's the uncomfortable truth that needs saying, and yes there is some repetition here but, most of these imported eggs are likely to be coming from systems that have been illegal in the UK since 2012.

Let that sink in for a moment. We banned conventional cages over a decade ago. At that time our industry was told it had to invest hundreds of millions of pounds in converting to enriched colonies or alternative systems. For years now we have championed higher welfare standards; we have built an entire marketing identity around British eggs meeting world-leading animal welfare and food safety standards.
And now we're importing eggs by the million from systems we deemed unacceptable for our own production.

In our current golden period of “alternative” egg production margin highs it is very easy to sit back and not worry too much about such things as egg imports, but if the figures we’ve highlighted don't strike you as problematic, you haven't been paying attention!!

We may have forgotten what it feels like, but rest assured at some point this market will switch to oversupply, that may be months or even years away, which perhaps makes us even more relaxed, but those growing import numbers may well be a large contributing factor, the trouble being that this particular import supply tap may well just keep flowing into the UK egg bucket regardless of whether it’s full or not!!

Let's start with the where and the why. Ukraine has become the UK's largest egg supplier almost overnight, and it's not difficult to understand why from a purely commercial perspective. Ukrainian eggs are reportedly being offered at 15-20p per dozen below UK prices. In a competitive market where every penny counts manufacturers simply can't ignore those kinds of numbers.

Ukraine's egg industry is dominated by large-scale operations – companies like Avangardco and Ovostar Union that run what industry delicately describes as "super mega" battery cage operations. These truly are industrial-scale facilities housing hens in conventional battery cages, producing eggs at costs that UK producers operating under enriched colony, barn and free-range systems simply cannot match.

The war in Ukraine has disrupted their traditional export markets in the Middle East and Asia. European markets have opened up through tariff-free trade agreements designed to support Ukraine economically during the conflict. The UK extended a two-year deal allowing tariff-free access for Ukrainian eggs and poultry meat, running until March 2026.
At this point, let me be absolutely clear that any level of support for Ukraine from a humanitarian perspective is without doubt utterly justifiable, what we are also seeing however, is that it can bring about unforeseen and unintended consequences.

Poland, the second-largest source, also still permits conventional caged systems at scale. Spain, Italy, and other Southern and Eastern European countries where cage production remains common have also increased shipments. The pattern is clear, eggs are flowing from regions where production standards and costs are lower, and they flow toward a UK market that's desperate for supply and hypersensitive to price.

Meanwhile, the Netherlands – historically our major supplier and a country with production standards closer to our own – has seen its market share decline dramatically. When you're competing against eggs produced at significantly lower cost under welfare standards you're not permitted to use, market forces work against you pretty quickly.

So now we have a standards gap between systems banned in the UK and yet still able to supply into our market from other shores, and our own UK production systems which carry much greater levels of investment per bird in order to achieve higher welfare and environmental credentials, but it should be noted that they also achieve the production of eggs at a higher cost per dozen.

If you happen to be a little cynical then the hypocrisy is breathtaking. As producers we’ve been driven to meet ever-higher welfare standards. As an industry we celebrate British eggs as welfare friendly. We pat ourselves on the back for being progressive on animal welfare. And then we import eggs from battery cages by the lorry-load and pretend it's fine because they're not produced here.

From a purely commercial perspective, the impact on UK producers is potentially savage and the way it plays through is particularly insidious. These imports aren't primarily going through retail. They're going into foodservice and food manufacturing – the catering sector, institutional feeding, processed foods. The parts of the market where origin labelling is weakest, traceability is poorest, and consumers have least visibility of what they're actually eating.

Our consumers might very well be placing British Lion eggs in their supermarket trolley whilst eating imported battery cage eggs in their sandwich at lunch, their cake at teatime, their ready meal at dinner. In reality they could well be paying for welfare standards in one part of their diet whilst unknowingly supporting the systems we thought we'd rejected in another part.

The British Egg Industry Council estimates that imports now represent approximately 12% of the UK market. That's not insignificant. That's enough volume to materially affect pricing, enough to create genuine competitive pressure on domestic producers, enough to question whether all those welfare investments were actually worth making if we're just going to allow cheaper alternatives to flood in.

The food safety implications have been mentioned before and should be keeping people awake at night. We operate under the Lion Code of Practice, which represents arguably the most stringent food safety regime for eggs anywhere in the world. Vaccination against Salmonella is mandatory. Testing is rigorous and frequent. Traceability is comprehensive. Hygiene standards are exacting. The system works – UK eggs have an enviable safety record.

Ukrainian eggs don't operate under equivalent standards. The BEIC has explicitly warned of "salmonella and quality issues associated with Ukrainian eggs in Europe." That's not speculation or scaremongering. That's documented problems with imported product.

Mark Williams, BEIC chairman, has specifically urged foodservice operators to "check what they're buying carefully, particularly if they are serving vulnerable groups such as young children, pregnant women or older consumers." The fact that warning needs to be issued tells you everything about the confidence levels around safety standards.

Once these eggs enter the UK market, traceability becomes murky. Shell eggs require marking with origin codes, but egg products – liquid, frozen, or dried egg used in manufacturing – have much weaker origin labelling requirements. An egg produced in a Ukrainian battery cage, shipped to a processor, converted to liquid egg and sold to a UK based food manufacturer becomes effectively invisible to the consumer.

We've built food safety systems based on the assumption that eggs consumed in the UK meet UK standards. That assumption is no longer valid, and we haven't adjusted our systems to account for that reality.
Perhaps the most galling aspect of this situation is the moral inconsistency it reveals.

For decades, animal welfare organisations campaigned against battery cages. They mobilised public opinion, pressured retailers, lobbied government. They won. Battery cages were banned. It was hailed as a major victory for animal welfare, proof that public values could overcome commercial considerations.

But where's the campaign against battery cage eggs coming through the back door? Where's the pressure on government to close the loophole? Where's the mobilisation of public opinion that was so effective against domestic producers?

Well, when we covered this a few months ago you could argue the silence was deafening and there was a lack of joined up approach. It is therefore more than encouraging to see that not only is action being taken, but it is done so by the collective as we see that BFREPA, BEIC, CIWF and RSPCA have written jointly to Prime Minister Starmer seeking urgent action with regard to upcoming tariff suspensions and the need for imported egg to meet an equivalent of our own standards.

The government's position has historically been inconsistent. On one hand, ministers regularly celebrate British agriculture's high standards and promise to protect them in trade negotiations. On the other hand, they've extended tariff-free access for Ukrainian eggs and done precious little to ensure equivalent standards, so let us hope that this latest contact from our major industry stakeholders, both sharpens their focus and brings them to the table to address this problem.

Fingers crossed that is the case and we see some serious movement towards restricting this free for all. If we see no change, then where does this import surge take us? Let's think through the trajectories, because they would not be encouraging, but they should be enough to make sure we do see positive action to prevent them.

Scenario One: The Erosion
Imports continue to increase. Price competition intensifies. UK producers, unable to compete with lower-cost lower-standard imports, steadily exit. UK production capacity declines. We become more import dependent. Welfare standards that cost money to maintain become economic liabilities rather than market advantages.

Eventually, we're in a situation where "British eggs" become a premium niche product for those willing to pay extra, whilst the bulk of the market is supplied by imports from whatever country can produce most cheaply regardless of standards. We've effectively outsourced our food production to regions with lower standards whilst maintaining the fiction that we care about welfare.

Scenario Two: The Two-Tier Market
Retail remains largely British Lion, with major retailers maintaining their commitments to UK-produced eggs meeting high standards. But foodservice and manufacturing become dominated by cheaper imports. We end up with a two-tier market: visible eggs that meet high standards, invisible eggs in processed food that meet no particular standard at all.

Consumers who buy shell eggs feel virtuous about supporting welfare. But they're unknowingly eating battery cage eggs in their food manufacturing and catering. The welfare premium becomes performance theatre rather than meaningful change.

Scenario Three: The Regulatory Response
Government belatedly recognises the problem and introduces meaningful border protections. Imports are required to meet equivalent welfare standards. The tariff-free access is qualified or withdrawn. Ukrainian and Polish battery cage eggs are effectively blocked unless production systems improve.

This protects UK producers but creates diplomatic difficulties with Ukraine, costs consumers through higher prices, and potentially triggers challenges under trade law. It's the right thing to do from a standards perspective but politically difficult and commercially disruptive.

Scenario Four: The Industry Collapse
Surely it’s too hard to think we could ever end up here, but in the longer term if the combination of import competition, cost inflation, AI disruption, and regulatory pressure continues, then could we actually see significant numbers of UK producers exit. If so, then Packers lose supply and become increasingly reliant on imports. Processing capacity shutters or becomes simply import-handling rather than UK-egg processing.

UK production falls below critical mass needed to maintain infrastructure, veterinary services, breeding programs, and supply chain functionality. We transition from largely self-sufficient to heavily import-dependent. Food security becomes a real concern when geopolitical events disrupt supply chains.

Which scenario plays out depends on decisions being made now by government, retailers, producers, and consumers. But without change to the current situation, the trajectory points toward outcomes that should concern anyone who values welfare standards, food security, or the viability of British agriculture.

Let's look at what a coherent policy response could look like, because it's not complicated conceptually even if it's difficult politically.
First: imports should meet equivalent standards. If battery cages are illegal for UK producers, eggs from battery cages shouldn't be allowed into the UK market. Full stop. Not for retail, not for foodservice, not for manufacturing. If welfare standards matter, they should matter consistently.

This could be achieved through tariff structures that make lower-standard imports economically unviable, through direct import bans on product from non-equivalent systems, or through labelling requirements that give consumers genuine information about welfare standards of imported eggs.

Second: origin labelling needs extending. Shell eggs have it. Egg products need it too. If liquid egg is from Ukrainian battery cages, that needs to be disclosed. If egg powder in your cake is from Polish conventional cages, consumers deserve to know. Traceability should follow the egg through processing.

Third: trade policy needs aligning with domestic policy. You can't simultaneously tell farmers to meet ever-higher standards whilst negotiating trade deals that flood the market with lower-standard product. Either standards matter and are protected at the border, or they don't matter and shouldn't be imposed domestically.

Fourth: welfare campaigns need consistency. Animal welfare organisations that campaigned successfully against domestic battery cages need to campaign equally hard against imported battery cage eggs. The hypocrisy of domestic absolutism combined with import tolerance undermines their moral authority and their cause.

Fifth: food safety vigilance needs increasing. With a greater proportion of eggs coming from systems with weaker safety regimes, monitoring and testing need to intensify. The absence of major problems to date doesn't mean we can be complacent about risks.

None of this is particularly radical or unreasonable. It's just treating standards seriously rather than as nice-to-have extras that apply when convenient but can be ignored when they're commercially inconvenient.
The bottom line is that the recent and large spike in egg imports isn't just a market fluctuation or a temporary response to supply constraints. It's a structural shift driven by cost differentials that arise from welfare standard differences we've chosen not to address at the border.

It's not sustainable. It's not fair. It's not coherent policy. And it's not going to end well unless decisions are made to correct course.

We spent decades building British egg production into a success story – high welfare, excellent food safety, largely self-sufficient, internationally respected. We're in the process of dismantling that achievement through policy incoherence and commercial short-termism.

The import surge isn't an accident or an unforeseeable consequence. It's the entirely predictable result of opening borders to lower-standard product whilst maintaining higher standards for domestic production. Economics 101 tells you what happens: cheaper product displaces more expensive product unless there's market protection or consumer willingness to pay a premium that overcomes the cost difference.

Neither protection nor sufficient premium exists. So displacement happens. And we wring our hands and wonder how we got here, as if the answer wasn't obvious from the start.