Coca-Cola plans US cane sugar alternative after Trump push
"We're going to be bringing a Coke sweetened with US cane sugar into the market this fall, and I think that will be an enduring option for consumers," said CEO James Quincey on a call with analysts.
The company currently uses high-fructose corn syrup (HFCS) for many of its US products -- a sweetener that has long drawn criticism from Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and his "Make America Healthy Again" agenda.
Trump last week said that the company had agreed to use cane sugar in the United States version of Coke.
"This will be a very good move by them -- You'll see. It's just better!" Trump wrote on Truth Social.
Coca-Cola at the time did not confirm the move even if it said it appreciated Trump's "enthusiasm" for its brand.
In announcing the new option, Quincey insisted that the main Coke product would still be made with corn syrup, with the cane sugar version offered as an alternative.
Mexican Coke -- which is made with cane sugar -- is often sold at a premium in US stores and prized for its more "natural" flavor.
The US president did not explain what motivated his push for the change, which would not impact his well-known favorite beverage, Diet Coke.
Since his return to the White House, Trump has reinstalled a special button in the Oval Office that summons a helping of the sugar-free carbonated drink.
HFCS became popular in the 1970s, with its use skyrocketing thanks to government subsidies for corn growers and high import tariffs on cane sugar.
Any shift away from corn is likely to draw backlash in the Corn Belt, a Midwestern region that has been a stronghold of support for Trump.
Both HFCS and sucrose (cane sugar) are composed of fructose and glucose, but differ at the structural level.
Those differences don't appear to significantly affect health outcomes, according to research.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The South African
14 minutes ago
- The South African
'There's no white genocide': US lawmaker pleads SA's case amid sanctions bill
US Representative Jonathan L. Jackson, during an address to the House Foreign Affairs Committee, has opposed H.R. 2633, the US-South Africa Bilateral Relations Review Act of 2025 that aims to sanction South Africa and some ANC officials. On Wednesday, he said the bill 'does absolutely nothing to advance our bilateral relations with South Africa and in fact threatens to undermine it'. Jackson described the bill as 'not diplomacy' but 'coercion', based on a 'deeply fogged premise' that ignores the complexities and significant progress made together. Jackson stated that there was 'no credibility, no truth to saying white South Africans have experienced genocide'. 'Those were manufactured pictures,' he added, and emphasised the absence of a white genocide in South Africa. Jackson noted South Africa is the largest US trading partner in Africa, with over $20.5 billion (R359 billion) in two-way trade. He described South Africa as a strategic partner and a strong democracy committed to human rights. The two countries cooperate on global issues like health, climate, trade and education, Jackson added, stressing the importance of 'mutual respect' and 'respectful dialogues' to build on progress and yield benefits for both nations. Jackson warned that the proposed bill would increase tensions and undermine the progress South Africa and the US had already made. He urged Congress to allow diplomacy to 'play a central role in resolving political differences' based on international law and respect for sovereignty. He reminded the committee that the US had had relations with South Africa for less than 30 years since apartheid ended, and said South Africa had the right to an independent point of view. Let us know by leaving a comment below, or send a WhatsApp to 060 011 021 1 Subscribe to The South African website's newsletters and follow us on WhatsApp, Facebook, X and Bluesky for the latest news.
eNCA
2 hours ago
- eNCA
US-South Africa Bilateral Relations Review Act clears first hurdle
TSHWANE - The US-South Africa Bilateral Relations Review Act has passed through committee and will now make its way to Congress for a vote before it can be approved by the Senate. READ: 'It is a mockery' - ANC slams US move to sanction its officials The bill gives President Donald Trump sweeping authority to impose sanctions on ANC leaders accused of backing America's rivals and acting against American interests. US opinion on South Africa's foreign policy has been negative for some time The Managing Partner of strategic consulting firm, Calabar Africa, Phillip van Niekerk and Hudson Institute Senior Fellow, Joshua Meservey discussed this with eNCA.
Daily Maverick
2 hours ago
- Daily Maverick
US House of Representatives' Foreign Affairs Committee passes first round of anti-SA Bill
The Bill calls for a review of US-SA relations and for sanctions against the South African government and ANC leaders. A Bill that would require the Trump administration to conduct a full review of US-South Africa relations and to identify South African government and ANC leaders eligible for sanctions, passed the US House of Representatives Foreign Affairs Committee this week. The committee passed the 'US-South Africa Bilateral Relations Review Act of 2025' by a vote of 34-16, with 28 Republicans and six Democrats supporting it and only Democrats opposing. It will now go to the full House of Representatives, where observers believe it will pass. It envisages SA government and ANC leaders being sanctioned under America's Global Magnitsky Act, which imposes financial and visa restrictions on individuals deemed guilty of human rights abuses or corruption. The Bill would also require the US Administration to determine if South Africa has undermined US national security or foreign policy interests. 'Aligning with America's adversaries' The Bill cites a long list of actions by the ANC government which it says have offended the US, centred on its good relations with Russia, China and Iran, and its hostility to Israel and Taiwan. The Bill was introduced by Texan Republican Ronny Jackson, a firm supporter of President Donald Trump. He told the committee that South Africa, while claiming to be non-aligned, had recently abandoned the US and its allies by increasingly aligning with America's adversaries such as China, Russia, Iran, and Iranian military proxies such as Hamas. He cited SA hosting the Chinese government's Confucius Institutes, conducting military exercises with China and Russia, and its alleged involvement in efforts to downgrade the US dollar. He also said, 'South Africa is systematically going after our partners and allies.' He cited its downgrading of Taiwan's presence in the country, 'falsely accusing the State of Israel of genocide at the illegitimate International Criminal Court and mimicking Iran's disgusting dismissal of the atrocities committed by Hamas on October the 7th' (the date of the attack by Hamas on southern Israel). Jackson said 'extreme politicians from the African National Congress have led efforts to target Afrikaners'. Daily Maverick recently revealed that the America Israel Public Affairs Committee (Aipac) was a significant donor to Jackson, the sponsor of the Bill, and several other members of Congress hostile to SA. Of the six Democrats who voted for the Bill in the Foreign Affairs Committee, Brad Sherman and Jared Moskowitz are known to be strong Israel supporters. Bill Keating and George Latimer represent districts with large Jewish populations and Ted Lieu was born in Taiwan. Gregory Meeks, senior Democrat on the Foreign Relations Committee and most other Democrats on the committee, strongly opposed the Bill. Meeks said SA acted as a leader not only among African countries, but also on the world stage – and was this year chairing the G20. The US and SA had a long history of partnership, which the Bill 'will not help to deepen or further'. 'South Africa has taken a number of foreign policy positions that I happen not to agree with. But in mature relations between countries, we can deal with those differences through diplomacy and dialogue. This legislation does just the opposite, taking a heavy hand'. He said, 'President Trump has already disproportionately targeted South Africa. He's done this by trying to embarrass President Ramaphosa in the Oval Office, with faulty evidence of purported atrocities in the country, by instituting an executive order cutting all US assistance in the country, and putting in its place a special refugee resettlement programme for Afrikaners. 'Glaring hypocrisy' 'And at the same time, he's blocking the resettlement of literally all other refugees to the United States… This is glaring hypocrisy.' Jackson's Bill is an updated version of a Bill which was introduced last year, but which ran out of time when Congress ended before elections in November.
