UK bans junk food ads: why marketers now face jail time (just kidding)

On January 5, 2026, England implemented comprehensive restrictions on the marketing of foods high in fat, sugar or salt (HFSS), marking one of the most significant interventions in commercial food advertising in three decades. The regulations, first announced in July 2020 as part of the government's obesity strategy, prohibit volume price promotions such as "buy one get one free" offers and restrict the placement of HFSS products in prominent store locations.

According to the Food (Promotion and Placement) (England) Regulations 2021, the new rules apply to medium and large retailers with 50 or more employees. Businesses must remove HFSS products from store entrances, checkout areas and aisle ends, while online retailers face restrictions on displaying these products on homepages, checkout pages and pop-up advertisements.

The restrictions come after a voluntary industry agreement launched in July 2025 aimed to prepare advertisers for the changes. IAB UK, the Advertising Association, ISBA and IPA coordinated a cross-industry awareness campaign ahead of the October 2025 voluntary implementation date.

Policy details and enforcement

The regulations define HFSS foods using the 2004-2005 nutrient profiling model, originally developed by the Food Standards Agency for regulating television advertising to children. Products scoring 4 or more points for food, or 1 or more point for drinks, fall under the restrictions.

Categories affected include prepared soft drinks with added sugar, savoury snacks, breakfast cereals, confectionery, ice cream, cakes, sweet biscuits, morning goods, desserts, sweetened yoghurt, pizza, potato products and ready meals. The government estimates that 64% of men and 60% of women in England live with overweight or obesity, with 20% of year six children classified as obese in 2019.

Food authorities enforce the regulations through improvement notices and fixed monetary penalties of £2,500 for non-compliance. The enforcement process allows businesses to correct violations before facing financial penalties, with appeals available through the First-tier Tribunal.

Stakeholder reactions and concerns

A qualitative study involving 42 expert stakeholders conducted between September and December 2020 revealed mixed reactions to the proposals. Policy and advocacy stakeholders expressed cautious optimism, while commercial stakeholders voiced disappointment about what they viewed as misdirected regulation.

According to one policy stakeholder interviewed for the research: "We were pleased to see acknowledgement through the obesity strategy of those environmental factors that contribute to excess weight and then subsequent poor health. And now we just need to see it implemented."

Commercial stakeholders countered that the restrictions target the wrong areas. One industry representative stated: "Disappointment, I think, because it's the wrong policy, for a whole variety of different reasons. It won't, I mean, not only will it not make any difference to childhood obesity, actually, I think it could make it worse in a few different ways."

Implementation challenges

A common theme across all stakeholder groups involved frustration with the policy process and lack of clarity regarding specific implementation details. Many policies in the announcement had been subject to previous consultations without outcomes, including further advertising restrictions on TV and online, in-store promotion restrictions and mandatory calorie labelling for the out-of-home sector.

The government originally planned to implement a 9 pm watershed for HFSS television advertising and restrictions on paid-for HFSS advertising online. However, these measures faced delays, with the advertising watershed postponed from October 2025 to an undetermined future date.

Stakeholders particularly questioned how online advertising restrictions would function across social media platforms, influencer marketing and cross-border activities. The complexity of the online environment raised concerns about definition and enforcement mechanisms.

Exemptions and special cases

The regulations exempt several business categories, including care homes serving food solely to residents, educational institutions for children under 18, and restaurants. "Meal deal" promotions remain permitted when foods are promoted as intended for consumption together as a single meal by one or more people.

Specialist retailers selling only or mainly food from a single schedule 1 category face exemption from location restrictions but must comply with volume price promotion restrictions. The regulations also exempt products sold by businesses with fewer than 50 employees and stores with relevant floor area under 185.8 square metres.

Concerns about regressivity

All stakeholder types highlighted concerns about potentially regressive impacts of restricting price promotions. According to the research, families depend on price promotions to feed their children, and for some, purchasing HFSS products represents one of the few ways to provide treats.

An advocacy stakeholder noted: "The multi-buy offers will impact families with less means and larger families, so yeah, if they are still going to buy their two bottles of Coke or whatever, then yes, they will have less money in their pocket."

Policy stakeholders suggested balancing any restrictions with measures to reduce prices of healthier alternatives, possibly through subsidies or VAT rebalancing. Commercial stakeholders advocated for policies addressing societal-level drivers of obesity such as inequalities.

Broader policy context

Stakeholders across all groups agreed that HFSS marketing restrictions alone cannot address underlying obesity drivers including socioeconomic position, cultural norms and the physical food environment. The focus on marketing restrictions potentially diverts attention from more fundamental issues like inequalities, social norms and comprehensive food environment improvements.

One policy stakeholder observed: "I just think there's logical inconsistencies in this plan, as there have been in others, which really miss some of the drivers of obesity we see in this country."

Nevertheless, stakeholders acknowledged that if implemented comprehensively, the package of measures could make a difference. A policy stakeholder stated: "I think I would agree that if all of these policies were implemented as strictly as possible, so as in not watered down, I think that they could be really good group of policies that cover quite a range of spaces."

Reformulation concerns

Policy and advocacy stakeholders cautioned against overreliance on product reformulation. Existing reformulation programmes sometimes produce slightly less unhealthy products rather than encouraging healthy eating practices. Recent research demonstrates associations between ultra-processed food consumption and multiple adverse health outcomes, supporting concerns that "lower fat" or "lower sugar" products may not be healthier if they remain ultra-processed.

Commercial stakeholders emphasized their ongoing investments in reformulation programmes responding to consumer preferences, particularly the move toward plant-based foods. They argued that marketing restrictions could disrupt these investments. However, policy stakeholders noted that voluntary reformulation programmes have shown limited success, with performance varying significantly across product categories.

International comparisons

The UK approach contrasts with food marketing regulations in other jurisdictions. Chile implemented comprehensive food labelling and marketing restrictions in 2016, including warnings on packages, restrictions on marketing to children and limitations on sales in schools. Research indicates these policies led to reduced purchasing of restricted products.

London's Transport for London network banned HFSS advertising across its entire network in February 2019. Health economic modelling suggests this restriction could have significant health, cost and equity impacts, though comprehensive evaluation continues.

Industry perspectives on collaboration

Commercial stakeholders highlighted their existing initiatives promoting healthier lifestyles, including reformulation programmes to remove sugar and fat, television advertisements promoting vegetables to children, removal of cartoon characters from HFSS products and trials of nudge techniques in retail locations.

These stakeholders suggested government could learn from voluntary industry programmes rather than implementing blanket restrictions. One commercial stakeholder stated: "I think all these kinds of things help and it would be good, I think, to see government taking more interest and embracing a holistic approach which brings together and talks about all these things, and gets industry and NGOs and charities and everybody, all stakeholders, working together in a kind of constructive way, instead of arguing about policies."

Timeline of key developments

• 1992: The Health of the Nation strategy initiated government focus on obesity
• 2004-2005: Food Standards Agency developed nutrient profiling model
• December 2021: Food (Promotion and Placement) (England) Regulations enacted
• July 2020: Government announced obesity strategy including HFSS marketing restrictions 
• October 2022: Location restrictions on HFSS product placement implemented
• July 2025: Industry launched voluntary awareness campaign ahead of October implementation
• October 2025: Voluntary compliance period began for advertising restrictions
• January 2026: Volume price promotion restrictions and statutory enforcement began

Summary

Who: The UK Department of Health and Social Care implemented the regulations affecting retailers with 50 or more employees selling food to England, while exempting small businesses, restaurants, care homes and educational institutions.

What: Comprehensive restrictions on HFSS food marketing including prohibition of volume price promotions like "buy one get one free" offers, restrictions on product placement in store entrances, checkout areas and aisle ends, and limitations on online promotion through homepages, checkout pages and pop-up advertisements.

When: The government announced the policy in July 2020, with location restrictions implemented in October 2022 and volume price restrictions taking effect January 5, 2026, following delays to originally planned timelines.

Where: The regulations apply to England specifically, covering both physical retail stores with relevant floor area above 185.8 square metres and online marketplaces operated by qualifying businesses selling to English consumers.

Why: The government aims to tackle obesity rates affecting 67% of men and 60% of women in England, with particular concern for childhood obesity affecting 20% of year six children, by restricting commercial marketing activities that promote unhealthy purchasing and eating behaviours.