How are UK drinks brands responding to artificial sweetener regulations and the sugar tax, and what reformulation strategies are members using?

The sugar tax and HFSS regulations have forced many brands to reformulate to stay commercially viable, but this has created a difficult choice between artificial sweeteners and natural sugars. Members report mixed market responses:

**Market landscape:** - Several established brands (e.g. London Essence, Fever-Tree) have come under scrutiny for their sweetener choices. Fever-Tree originally built their brand on cane sugar but may now be using artificial sweeteners in some lines, though packaging claims suggest they maintain a no-artificial-sweeteners positioning. - Large multinational brands like Pepsi are responding with global nutrition initiatives, though members note these are often PR responses rather than fundamental reformulations.

**Member approach:** - Members emphasise that a "solid values-driven ethos" is key to differentiating in this environment. One founder specifically chose to use natural sugars rather than artificial sweeteners in their category, positioning this as a core brand value. - The consensus view is that less-processed sugar is preferable to artificial alternatives, particularly for founder-led brands with strong philosophical positions.

**Key concern:** While well-intentioned, the sugar tax and HFSS regulations have unintentionally pushed brands without strong values toward artificial sweeteners to maintain margin and hit regulatory thresholds. This has become a commercial disadvantage for brands committed to natural formulations.