Key takeaways

• The HPB and SFA are prepared to take the necessary enforcement action against errant advertisers of food products, and they will vigilantly pursue advertisers. The HPB and SFA will actively take investigative measures where there are consumer complaints and/or reports of consumer confusion. To avoid regulatory penalties and adverse publicity, advertisers of food products should ensure close compliance with the applicable regulations.
• The advertising or labelling of food products in a manner that is false, misleading or deceptive, or is likely to create an erroneous impression regarding its value, merit or safety, is considered a breach of the Sale of Food Act 1973. The penalty for such breach is a fine of up to SGD 5,000 for the first conviction, and a fine of up to SGD 10,000 and/or imprisonment for up to three months for subsequent convictions.
• Noncompliance with applicable "Nutri-Grade" labelling requirements is an offense punishable with a fine of up to SGD 1,000 for the first offense, and a fine of up to SGD 2,000 for the second or subsequent conviction.

In more detail

On 29 February 2024, it was reported on The Straits Times, a Singapore-based news agency, that there was consumer confusion surrounding a bubble tea chain's advertisements.

The bubble tea chain had advertised three of its beverages alongside the claim "zero sugar, zero calories and zero guilt" and that the claim was "applicable to all drinks." This had created the impression that its beverages were "zero sugar" and "zero calories". The bubble tea chain's manager later clarified that the advertisement was meant to promote the chain's sugar substitute, which was purportedly "zero calorie zero fat," and not the beverages.

Consumers were reportedly perplexed by the advertisements. Bubble tea, a popular beverage in Singapore and the region, is generally known by many to be a sweet beverage containing a considerable amount of sugar. Accordingly, to claim that such beverages contained "zero sugar" and "zero calories" was misleading to consumers.

Consumers also reportedly expressed their confusion on the "Nutri-Grade" ratings of the respective beverages featured on the advertisements as, despite the beverage being "zero-sugar", they had a "Nutri-Grade" rating of "C." Beverages in the "C" range have between 5g and 10g of sugar per 100ml, or 1.2g to 2.8g of saturated fat per 100ml. More information on the mandatory "Nutri-Grade" grading system and labelling requirements may be found in our previous alert here. The HPB has requested the chain for nutrient information on the three beverages to substantiate the "Nutri-Grade" claims. Food and beverage operators must be prepared to substantiate their "Nutri-Grade" labels and nutrition information on their drinks through supporting documentation such as laboratory reports.

Following the initial report on 29 February 2024, it was reported that in less than a week, on 3 March 2024, that the HPB and SFA are already deliberating on whether to take enforcement action in relation to the misleading advertisements. The swift response time by the HPB and SFA demonstrates that the health and food safety authorities in Singapore take complaints and/or reports of consumer confusion seriously and are prepared to take the necessary enforcement action against errant advertisers of food products.

* * * * *

© 2024 Baker & McKenzie.Wong & Leow. All rights reserved. Baker & McKenzie.Wong & Leow is incorporated with limited liability and is a member firm of Baker & McKenzie International, a global law firm with member law firms around the world. In accordance with the common terminology used in professional service organizations, reference to a "principal" means a person who is a partner, or equivalent, in such a law firm. Similarly, reference to an "office" means an office of any such law firm. This may qualify as "Attorney Advertising" requiring notice in some jurisdictions. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.