The latest news, trends, analysis, interviews and podcasts from the global food and beverage industry

As political rhetoric once again puts high-fructose corn syrup under the spotlight, FoodBev’s Leah Smith unpacks Donald Trump’s unexpected call for Coca-Cola to switch to cane sugar. Earlier today, Coca-Cola confirmed it would be launching a new variant made with cane sugar, to 'complement' its existing portfolio. Even prior to Coca-Cola's announcement, the move has nonetheless sent ripples through agriculture, manufacturing and commodity markets. But is reformulation really on the table – or is this just another case of politics stirring the pot?

In a post on his social media platform Truth Social last week, US President Donald Trump claimed: “I have been speaking to Coca-Cola about using REAL Cane Sugar in Coke in the United States, and they have agreed to do so…This will be a very good move by them”.

Trump linked the move to his administration’s 'Make America Healthy Again' initiative, framing cane sugar as a “purer, better product” than high-fructose corn syrup (HFCS).

HFCS is widely used to sweeten products ranging from soda and juice to breakfast cereals and baked goods. It is also a common ingredient in pharmaceuticals, personal care products and industrial goods.

Following Trump's post, on Tuesday 22 July Coca-Cola confirmed it will launch a new version of its signature soft drink sweetened with cane sugar later this year, stating that the new version of the drink would “complement”, not replace the current soda, but does this suggest that reformulation is coming?

A longstanding debate reignited

The US beverage industry has relied heavily on HFCS since the 1970s, when rising sugar prices, technological advancements in corn refining and strong government subsidies made domestic corn a cost-effective sweetener source. Today, the US remains the world’s largest corn exporter, and the corn refining industry directly supports approximately 9,700 jobs.

By contrast, cane sugar production thrives in tropical regions, with Brazil, India and Thailand leading global output. US production lags behind, constrained by climate and by federal tariffs and quotas that limit imported sugar.

Market research shows the HFCS market was worth around $6 billion in 2024. Still, consumption has declined over time – from a peak of 85.7 pounds per person in 1999 to just 53 pounds in 2023, according to US Department of Agriculture figures.

Despite Trump’s post, Coca-Cola did not initially confirm a formula change; instead, the company thanked the president for his enthusiasm and teased upcoming innovations. It later reaffirmed that HFCS is safe and noted it already offers cane sugar versions of Coca-Cola in the US, such as ‘Mexican Coke’ and limited-run products released during religious holidays like Passover, before announcing the launch of a new cane sugar variant of the iconic drink.

Citing expert consensus and guidance from the American Medical Association, Coca-Cola stated that HFCS is no more likely to contribute to obesity than other caloric sweeteners. The company also acknowledged changing consumer preferences, noting that Coca-Cola Zero Sugar saw a 14% increase in global volumes last year, compared to just 2% growth for traditional full-sugar sodas.

Health or hype?

HFCS has long been linked to rising obesity rates in the US. Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F Kennedy Jr recently called it “a formula for making you obese and diabetic”.

However, most nutrition experts agree that 'sugar is sugar'. HFCS and cane sugar have similar calorie counts and are metabolised in much the same way. HFCS does offer functional advantages, such as longer shelf life and moisture retention – qualities particularly useful in beverages and baked goods.

“The name sounds complex, but high fructose corn syrup (HFCS) – which we use to sweeten some of our beverages – is actually just a sweetener made from corn,” Coca-Cola told FoodBev in a statement. “It’s safe; it has about the same number of calories per serving as table sugar and is metabolised in a similar way by your body.”

The company also cited the American Medical Association’s stance that HFCS is no more likely to cause obesity than other full-calorie sweeteners, assuring consumers that Coca-Cola products “do not contain any harmful substances”.

Economic ripple effects

Behind the health debate lies a deeper issue: agricultural economics. Replacing HFCS with cane sugar on a national scale would require overhauling ingredient sourcing, factory lines and supply chains – potentially raising production costs and increasing reliance on imported sugar subject to tariffs and quotas.

The Corn Refiners Association responded swiftly to this challenge, warning that “potential product reformulations” could cost thousands of manufacturing jobs and reduce farm incomes. While most US-grown corn is used for biofuels, HFCS remains a significant component of domestic sweetener sales.

John Bode, chair of the Corn Refiners Association, expressed scepticism over a full-scale switch: “For economic and practical reasons, Coca-Cola is more likely to introduce a cane sugar option for the US market rather than abandon HFCS altogether,” he commented. “Replacing high fructose corn syrup with cane sugar doesn’t make sense.”

The Association added that such a move could “depress farm income and boost imports of foreign sugar, all with no nutritional benefit”.

Politics over products

Trump’s interest in Coca-Cola is not new. His well-documented love of Diet Coke, which is sweetened with aspartame rather than HFCS or cane sugar, was famously symbolised by the ‘Diet Coke button’ on his White House desk.

If Coca-Cola were to reformulate its flagship product in response to political pressure, it could set a precedent across the food and beverage industry. But so far, the company seems focused on innovation rather than fundamental change.

Still, Trump’s statement caused shares in major corn processors to dip – proof of how political rhetoric can jolt commodity markets, even in the absence of confirmed action.

Change, if it comes, won’t be sweet and simple

Reformulating a product as iconic as Coca-Cola Classic is no easy feat.

Given current economics, ingredient costs and regulatory complexities, a complete transition to cane sugar remains unlikely. Instead, consumers may see more limited-edition or regional offerings, like those already available during Passover or in select international markets where cane sugar is the norm.

For manufacturers, the takeaway is clear: sweeteners remain a politically, nutritionally and economically charged issue. Whether change is driven by health trends, supply chain dynamics or presidential declarations, one thing is certain – any shift won’t be sweet and simple.