Trump's sugar economics for Coke amid the company's multi-billion tax case

Economic Times

18-07-2025

Synopsis
Trump claims Coca-Cola will switch to real cane sugar in US-made sodas, a move framed as a health win, though Coca-Cola's confirmation is vague. This shift taps into nostalgia and anti-corporate sentiment, potentially impacting corn farmers and sugar producers. Meanwhile, Coca-Cola faces a massive IRS dispute over profit-shifting, adding financial pressure.
Ninety-four percent of the world's population recognises the red-and-white Coca-Cola logo, according to a ResearchGate study citing multiple reports. That's not a brand — it's a global reflex. And now, Donald Trump wants in.US President Donald Trump is gettinghimself involded into the recipe of the planet's most iconic soft drink. Coca-Cola, Trump claimed this week, has agreed to replace high-fructose corn syrup (HFCS) with real cane sugar in its US-made sodas, a move he framed as a win for his "Make America Healthy Again" campaign.The announcement came via Trump's Truth Social platform, where he posted a mock-up of a Coke bottle reading 'Share a Coke with Trump' and declared, '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 — You'll see. It's just better!'Coca-Cola hasn't confirmed the change.But a vague statement hinted at something brewing: 'More details on new innovative offerings within our Coca-Cola product range will be shared soon,' the company said, while thanking the President for his 'enthusiasm.'
Coca-Cola is deeply embedded in American culture. By nudging its formula, Trump taps into nostalgia, anti-corporate sentiment, and populism. Cane sugar recalls a time when things supposedly tasted 'better,' like the Mexican Coke many Americans swear by.The message is simple: real over artificial, sugar over syrup, 'America First', even in your soda.It's also a nod to Trump's Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., who's crusading against ultra-processed foods. Kennedy has blamed HFCS for fuelling obesity and diabetes, calling it 'just a formula for making you obese and diabetic.'HFCS, derived from corn starch, dominates US soda recipes because it's cheaper, partly due to corn subsidies and tariffs on imported sugar.HFCS became Coke's sweetener of choice in the 1980s. But many consumers prefer the cane sugar version sold abroad, which they say tastes cleaner. Trump's move channels that feeling, but swapping out HFCS isn't just cosmetic.HFCS accounts for about 3% of total US corn usage, 410 million bushels a year, according to the US Department of Agriculture. Removing that would ripple through corn prices and farm incomes.The Corn Refiners Association (CRA) estimates such a shift could cut farm receipts by $2.2 to $5.1 billion, with worst-case losses reaching $7.5 billion. Iowa, Illinois and Nebraska alone could lose nearly $2.35 billion in the short term.'Replacing high-fructose corn syrup with cane sugar would cost thousands of American food manufacturing jobs, depress farm income, and boost imports of foreign sugar — all with no nutritional benefit,' warned CRA President and CEO John Bode, as per CBS.Coca-Cola remains a giant.As of July 17, 2025, it had a market cap of $298.16 billion. It reported $47.06 billion in revenue for 2024, with Q1 2025 revenues at $11.13 billion (down 2% YoY due to currency swings and bottling changes), while organic revenue rose 6%.Net income in 2024 hit $10.63 billion; Q1 2025 net income rose 4.8% to $3.33 billion.Coca-Cola sells 500+ brands in over 200 countries, reaching 1.9 billion people daily. It led the global non-alcoholic beverage market with over 40% share in 2024, according to Investing.com.The $478.14 billion carbonated beverage market is projected to hit $707.76 billion by 2034, as per Precedence Research. The cola segment alone could more than double, from $144.6 billion to $317.5 billion, by then, as per Prophecy Market Insights.In the US, Coke held a 44.9% share of the 2024 carbonated soft drink market, which was valued at $303.11 billion and is forecast to grow to $467.18 billion by 2030, according to Grand View Research.Core brands like Coke (19.2%), Sprite (8.1%), and Diet Coke (7.8%) remain dominant.What's also worth noting is that nearly 40% of Coca-Cola's global revenue comes from the US market alone. In 2024, North America contributed 39% to total revenue, followed by Europe, the Middle East and Africa at 23%, Latin America and Bottling Investments at 13% each, and Asia Pacific at 12%, as per the report.While Trump touts Coca-Cola's supposed health kick, the company is fighting a far more consequential battle, with the IRS. And the outcome could reset global norms on how multinationals are taxed.It goes back to 1996, when Coke and the IRS agreed on a royalty formula for profits from foreign subsidiaries: the so-called 10-50-50 rule. Under it, subsidiaries kept 10% of sales and half the residual profit; the US parent got the rest. In return, the IRS said it wouldn't impose accuracy-related penalties, so long as Coke stuck to the formula.That truce held, until 2011. As reported the Forbes, without warning, the IRS scrapped the agreement for tax years 2007 to 2009 and imposed a new method: the Comparable Profits Method (CPM), which bases income allocations on profits earned by similar independent companies.The switch inflated Coca-Cola's taxable income by $9 billion and hit it with $3.4 billion in tax deficiencies for those three years alone.Coke challenged the IRS in court, but in 2020, the US Tax Court largely sided with the government. While the court allowed Coke some credit for dividends paid, it upheld the IRS's overall approach.The company now owes $2.7 billion in back taxes, $6 billion with interest.In September 2024, Coca-Cola wired the full $6 billion to the IRS, labelling it a 'tax litigation deposit.' The company is still appealing, but the money's already gone.Coke's argues that the IRS pulled a bait and switch. After encouraging use of the 10-50-50 formula for years, the agency retroactively changed the rules and punished the company for following its guidance. In its own words, the IRS 'handed Coca-Cola a $3 billion jaywalking ticket' after leading it into the crosswalk.Additionally, the IRS accuses Coca-Cola of shifting billions in profits to low-tax countries like Ireland, Brazil, and Eswatini. In court, Judge Albert Lauber called the company's global tax structure 'astronomical.'The fallout is already visible. Coca-Cola in May 2024 raised $4 billion in debt, partly to deal with the load. Financial Express reported that the case could curb acquisitions and buybacks. Al Jazeera pegged the company's total exposure at up to '$16 billion, almost two years' worth of profits.A shift to cane sugar would likely boost demand for domestic producers, particularly in Florida and Louisiana, where most of the US cane sugar industry is based. In 2024, the US sugar market stood at 48.1 million tons, as per IMARC, and the cane segment accounted for roughly 40–45% of total supply, USDA ERS, 2025.This shift would be welcomed by powerful industry groups like the American Sugar Alliance, which have long advocated for reduced reliance on HFCS.Despite being shielded by the US Sugar Program, which keeps domestic prices high through tariffs and quotas, cane sugar producers have struggled. They face rising input costs, margin pressures, and stiff competition from cheaper HFCS, widely adopted since the 1980s.The sector has also seen significant consolidation, with sugarcane farms declining by 31% between 1997 and 2022, as reported Southern Ag Today. For many growers, a move back to real sugar in sodas would be a rare opportunity to reclaim lost ground.But the cost implications are steep.Cane sugar costs between $0.40 and $0.50 per pound in the US, compared to $0.20–$0.30 for HFCS. That could mean $800–$900 million in added annual costs for Coca-Cola alone, Hindustan Times reported, based on its estimated use of 2.7 billion pounds of sweetener.Consumers could see price hikes of 10–15% on sweetened drinks, as per HT.Switching would also force 'massive supply chain overhauls,' from storage to equipment upgrades.The labour impact is mixed. Corn processors and HFCS refiners may face job cuts, thousands, according to the CRA. Meanwhile, sugar refining jobs could grow slightly, but direct employment in that sector is modest — 14,000 to 15,000 people, as per IBISWorld, 2025.Scientifically, switching to cane sugar may not mean much. The FDA has stated there's no evidence of a meaningful safety difference between HFCS and cane sugar. Harvard nutritionist Frank Hu summed it up: 'Sugar in general' is the problem, not which kind.But the war on ultra-processed food is as much cultural as medical, and Trump is using that momentum.This is more than a formula change, it's a potential $6 billion shake-up in the domestic sugar economy, which accounts for 30% of US sugar supply.Trump's announcement may be political theatre, but for Coca-Cola, it could be smart brand positioning. With tax agents closing in and consumers rethinking processed foods, appearing to respond to health concerns could be a reputational buffer.'Real sugar Coke' fits 2025's consumer trends: nostalgia, authenticity and clean-label marketing. But overhauling sugar sourcing, supply chains and formulas won't be easy.