ARTICLE
17 August 2016

FDA Declares Label "Evaporated Cane Juice" False And Misleading In New Guidance

KL
Herbert Smith Freehills Kramer LLP

Contributor

Herbert Smith Freehills Kramer is a world-leading global law firm, where our ambition is to help you achieve your goals. Exceptional client service and the pursuit of excellence are at our core. We invest in and care about our client relationships, which is why so many are longstanding. We enjoy breaking new ground, as we have for over 170 years. As a fully integrated transatlantic and transpacific firm, we are where you need us to be. Our footprint is extensive and committed across the world’s largest markets, key financial centres and major growth hubs. At our best tackling complexity and navigating change, we work alongside you on demanding litigation, exacting regulatory work and complex public and private market transactions. We are recognised as leading in these areas. We are immersed in the sectors and challenges that impact you. We are recognised as standing apart in energy, infrastructure and resources. And we’re focused on areas of growth that affect every business across the world.
In its long-awaited final guidance issued May 25, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) advised against the use of the term "evaporated cane juice" on food labeling, recommending that the ingredient be listed as "sugar" instead.
United States Food, Drugs, Healthcare, Life Sciences

In its long-awaited final guidance issued May 25, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) advised against the use of the term "evaporated cane juice" on food labeling, recommending that the ingredient be listed as "sugar" instead. While the ingredient would commonly be understood to be sugar, the term "evaporated cane juice" is misleading as it is not "juice" within the meaning of the FDA's regulations. Thus, "FDA would consider a juice product sweetened with an ingredient derived from sugar cane and labeled as 100% fruit juice to be misbranded" under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, "because the '100% fruit juice' claim is false and misleading in that the product contains a non-juice sweetener in addition to the juice." The agency would not, however, object to "the addition of one or more truthful, non-misleading descriptors before the common or usual name 'sugar,'" including the use of a "coined term" to distinguish the ingredient from "other sugars on the market." View the guidance.

The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.

Mondaq uses cookies on this website. By using our website you agree to our use of cookies as set out in our Privacy Policy.

Learn More