The Coca-Cola recipe seemed untouchable. Until Europe first and Mexico later have decided to touch it

For decades, the Coca-Cola recipe has been treated almost like a state secret, guarded in a vault in Atlanta and protected by an aura of mystery. However, in the real world, governments have discovered that they do not need to infiltrate that vault to alter the world’s most famous drink, but can do so through legislative texts. Modifying, for example, the fiscal or regulatory framework can push any company to change its composition, its prices or its supply.

The case of Mexico. Without a doubt, it is one of the most solid in the world to understand how large-scale industrial change can be forced. And it is no wonder, because the driving force behind this change was not a direct order to rewrite the formula, but rather the entry into force of a new tax on sugary drinks. in 2014.

Here the effect it had was commented on by different studies which showed that, one year after the tax, purchases of sugary drinks fell by 6%, while purchases of water they rose 4%.

He had an answer. The fiscal scenario and the drop in sales logically generated strong pressure for the company to change its ingredients, causing great pressure on the mix of the company’s sweeteners. This opened an intense debate about the use of cane sugar versus high fructose corn syrup, and now the national government has put on the table the possibility of forcing Coca-Cola to stop using imported corn syrup and transition towards national cane sugar by selling it much cheaper.

In Europe. While Mexico uses fiscal pressure on consumption, the European Union is the perfect example of structural market regulation. And for those who have traveled to North America, you will have realized that the taste of Coca-Cola is different from what is drunk here in Europe. And a very important bureaucratic tangle is also to blame.

The culprit was none other than the strong intervention that the sugar market had in the European Union for 50 years through a complex quota system that came to an end on September 30, 2017.

Its consequences. Here European regulations historically limited the production of isoglucose, which is the European equivalent of American corn syrup, through strict quotas. This structural restriction forced its use in the soft drink industry to be much more contained than in the United States.

Although the European Commission continued to manage certain quantitative limits in the final phase of this legal regime, the regulation acted as a containment dam. Furthermore, several Member States have implemented their own taxes on soft drinks, separating the strategy of “market regulation” from “public health” policies against sugar consumption.

In India. To understand how far the fight between a State and the Atlanta giant can go, you have to travel to India in 1977. Here, unlike Mexico or Europe, the debate was not about cane sugar or sweeteners, but about sovereignty and corporate control due to the ‘fault’ of a currency control law that forced multinationals to dilute and reduce their foreign participation.

Here Coca-Cola reacted quickly to prevent any government from controlling its operations and therefore sharing its secret formula, and that is why it decided to leave the country in 1977 before submitting and revealing the secrets it had.

Images | Unsplash

In Xataka | Researchers have analyzed the impact of sugary drinks on global health. They have put their hands on their heads