DiamondBuzz
New Indian Standard Removes Ambiguity, Reserves “Diamond” for Natural Diamonds
This new BIS standard ensures that consumers can clearly distinguish between natural diamonds and laboratory-grown alternatives through mandatory disclosure and standardised terminology.
The Indian gem and jewellery industry has long faced challenges arising from the use of multiple, inconsistent, and often ambiguous terms to describe diamonds and their alternatives—particularly in digital and e-commerce environments. This lack of formal guidance has contributed to consumer confusion and inconsistent disclosure practices across the market.
The Natural Diamond Council (NDC) welcomes the adoption of IS 19469:2025 by the Bureau of Indian Standards (BIS), a modified adoption of ISO 18323:2015 – Jewellery: Consumer Confidence in the Diamond Industry. The new standard introduces a clear and enforceable framework for diamond terminology, establishing a definitive distinction between natural diamonds and laboratory-grown diamonds. By doing so, it strengthens consumer protection and supports the long-term credibility and integrity of the Indian diamond jewellery sector.
The new mandate claims that the term “diamond” applies exclusively to natural diamonds, as the word used alone always implies a natural origin. Under these rules, traders are permitted to use qualifiers such as “natural,” “real,” “genuine,” or “precious” to describe natural diamonds. The use of other terms like mined diamond, earth-mined diamond etc, are not permitted.
For laboratory-grown diamonds, the standard requires explicit and immediate disclosure at all times. Only the terms “laboratory-grown diamond” or “laboratory-created diamond” are permitted for commercial use. The standard expressly prohibits the use of misleading or promotional qualifiers—including nature’s, earth-friendly, conflict-free pure, cultured, or similar terms—that may imply equivalence with natural diamonds. The term “Synthetic Diamond” may be used in commercial documents or import/export documents, if so, required, under the laws or the regulation of any country, which such diamonds are to be exported, or from which such diamonds are to be imported.
Commenting on the development, Richa Singh, Managing Director, Natural Diamond Council, said: “Consumer protection is central to everything we do at the Natural Diamond Council. Clear, consistent terminology is essential to maintaining trust. By eliminating ambiguity and mandating full disclosure, these standards protect industry integrity and ensure consumers can confidently distinguish between a natural diamond and a laboratory-grown diamond.”
The Natural Diamond Council remains committed to working closely with BIS, Indian authorities, trade bodies, and industry stakeholders to support the correct implementation and enforcement of this terminology framework. By eliminating misleading descriptors and establishing consistent disclosure, the industry collectively safeguards the emotional and financial integrity of the diamond-buying experience.
DiamondBuzz
GIA says it can’t comply with industry bodies’ request for nominal, grading-linked contribution mechanism”
A coalition of 15 major industry organizations recently petitioned the Gemological Institute of America (GIA) to implement a “grading-linked contribution mechanism.” The goal was to secure sustainable funding for the Natural Diamond Council (NDC) to revitalize consumer marketing. However, the GIA has officially declined the request, citing legal and structural constraints.
The initiative, led by the Diamond Manufacturers & Importers Association of America (DMIA), suggested a nominal, sliding-scale surcharge based on carat size for every diamond graded by the GIA.
- Objective: To create a “fair, transparent, and scalable” revenue stream for natural diamond promotion.
- Rationale: Proponents argued that since every graded diamond benefits from GIA’s reputation, a small levy is a logical way to support the industry’s collective health.
- Precedent: The groups pointed to India’s successful implementation of small levies for industry promotion as a proof of concept.
3. GIA’s Official Stance
Despite the unified front of the 15 organizations (American Gem Trade Association, Antwerp World Diamond Centre, Bharat Diamond Bourse, CIBJO (World Jewellery Confederation), the Diamond Dealers Club of New York, the Dubai Multi Commodities Centre, the Gem & Jewellery Export Promotion Council, the Indian Diamond & Colorstone Association, the International Diamond Manufacturers Association, the Israel Diamond Manufacturers Association, Jewelers of America, United States Jewelry Council, World Diamond Council, and the World Federation of Diamond Bourses), the GIA has rejected the proposal
The GIA’s refusal to implement the proposed surcharge is rooted in its structural identity as a 501(c)(3) nonprofit organization. Under this legal designation, the GIA is strictly prohibited from diverted funds or collecting fees to benefit external, for-profit, or trade-specific marketing entities like the Natural Diamond Council (NDC).
Beyond the legal constraints, the organization maintains a firm boundary regarding its mission alignment; while industry groups seek to drive commercial demand, the GIA’s primary mandate is centered on consumer protection and rigorous scientific education. Engaging in commercial promotion could be perceived as a conflict of interest that undermines its role as an impartial arbiter of diamond quality.
Despite this rejection, the GIA has signaled a willingness for future support through collaborative efforts that fit within its educational purview. By focusing on “industry education” rather than “marketing,” the GIA can continue to fund internal initiatives that overlap with the NDC’s goals without violating its nonprofit status or compromising its reputation for objectivity.
The rejection by the GIA marks a significant hurdle for the NDC’s funding strategy. The industry now faces the challenge of creating a self-funded marketing engine without the “centralized gatekeeper” advantage that a grading lab surcharge would have provided.
Potential Alternative Paths:
- Implementing voluntary contribution models at the retail or wholesale level.
- Focusing on “educational” campaigns that GIA can legally support under its nonprofit status.
- Exploring government-backed levies in major diamond hubs (similar to the Indian model).
For Every Kind of Love: A Valentine’s Jewellery Edit by Kalyan Jewellers
From Carats to Cricket: Kumari Fine Jewellery Enters Franchise Sports with ‘Kumari Jets’
INDIA-US announcement on reaching a framework for an Interim Agreement
AWDC Hails EU-India Trade Pact, Sees Strong Export Boost for Antwerp-Polished Diamonds in India
Gold is Talking, Silver is Screaming – A Case for Prudent Repositioning
Japan, US Weigh Synthetic Diamond Facility to Strengthen Strategic Supply Chains
-
JB Insights2 weeks ago2026 THE ROAD AHEAD: Tradition Meets Technology, Sustainability, Personalization
-
DiamondBuzz1 week agoAWDC Hails EU-India Trade Pact, Sees Strong Export Boost for Antwerp-Polished Diamonds in India
-
JB Insights1 week agoGold is Talking, Silver is Screaming – A Case for Prudent Repositioning
-
DiamondBuzz1 week agoJapan, US Weigh Synthetic Diamond Facility to Strengthen Strategic Supply Chains
JewelBuzz is Asia’s First Digital Jewellery Media & India’s No.1 B2B Jewellery Magazine, published by AM Media House. Since 2016, we’ve been the trusted source for jewellery news, market trends, trade insights, exhibitions, podcasts, and brand stories, connecting jewellers, retailers, and industry professionals worldwide.