Trump Says Coke Will Be Made With Real Sugar. His Policies Make That More Difficult.

Government policy bears much of the blame for the use of high-fructose corn syrup, and Trump's policies will not change that.

This week, President Donald Trump officially announced the U.S. government's entry into an ongoing conflict—the cola wars.

"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," Trump said this week on Truth Social. "I'd like to thank all of those in authority at Coca-Cola. This will be a very good move by them — You'll see. It's just better!"

Government policy is part of the reason Coca-Cola does not use sugar in its American products, and Trump and his allies in Congress could change that. But his policies so far would do the opposite.

In much of the world, Coca-Cola products contain sugar made from either sugarcane or sugar beets. But in the U.S., the same drinks are made with high-fructose corn syrup—a processed sugar substitute made from corn starch. People have long had strong opinions about the difference and say sodas made from real sugar taste better. (Trump himself has often weighed in on the company's products: "The Coca Cola company is not happy with me—that's okay, I'll still keep drinking that garbage," he tweeted in 2012.)

A post on social media cannot force a private company to change its practices, and so far, Coca-Cola has been noncommittal on a switch.

"We appreciate President Trump's enthusiasm for our iconic Coca‑Cola brand," the company said in a statement posted to X the morning after Trump's announcement. "More details on new innovative offerings within our Coca‑Cola product range will be shared soon."

But the company also defended its use of a sugar substitute. "The name sounds complex, but high fructose corn syrup (HFCS) – which we use to sweeten some of our beverages – is actually just a sweetener made from corn," it said in a later message. "It's safe; it has about the same number of calories per serving as table sugar and is metabolized in a similar way by your body. The American Medical Association has confirmed that HFCS is no more likely to contribute to obesity than table sugar or other full-calorie sweeteners." In 2023, the AMA announced that "insufficient evidence exists to specifically restrict use of high fructose corn syrup (HFCS) or other fructose-containing sweeteners in the food supply or to require the use of warning labels on products containing HFCS."

Robert F. Kennedy Jr. was not convinced: Before he was confirmed as secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services, Kennedy called high-fructose corn syrup "just a formula for making you obese and diabetic" and pledged to crack down on its use in American food.

But there's a clear reason why Coca-Cola uses processed syrup in its American products: Government policy makes it cheaper to do so.

"Corn growers earn about $2.2 billion in federal subsidies each year," wrote Benjamin Seevers at the Foundation for Economic Education. "Corn subsidies also consequently subsidize the production of high-fructose corn syrup, leading to an 'overconsumption.' If these subsidies were eliminated, then cane sugar would be relatively more affordable to use in soft drinks and many other products."

Not only does the U.S. artificially lower the cost of corn, it also artificially raises the price of imported sugar.

Coca-Cola and Pepsi both switched from sugar to syrup in 1984, in what The New York Times called "the long-building preference of the soft-drink industry for high-fructose corn syrup—which is less expensive than the traditional cane- or beet- based sweetener—as well as the shrinking market of the sugar industry."

Indeed, it's more difficult to grow sugar in the United States. Sugarcane is the preferred method because it's a perennial crop, meaning it can be grown for multiple years at a time; sugar beets, meanwhile, have to be grown in rotations. But sugarcane grows best in tropical climates, so in the U.S., it's limited to places like Florida and Louisiana. Most of America's sugar therefore comes from beets. And since America eats more than twice the average amount of sugar as other developed nations, we import over 3 million metric tons each year.

"The United States has never been self-sufficient in sugar production and must rely on imports to meet market demand each year," according to the Sweetener Users Association, which advocates for a more market-based sugar policy. "Unlike with other commodities, the federal government…restricts [sugar] imports to keep domestic prices artificially high and mandates marketing allotments to restrict domestic production."

"Since the 1930s, the U.S. government has supported the domestic sugar industry through an elaborate, Soviet-style import quota and price support system," Daniel Griswold, formerly of the Cato Institute, wrote in 2022. "The program essentially guarantees the domestic sugar industry 85% of the domestic market and a minimum price of 20 cents per pound for raw cane sugar and 25 cents for beet sugar."

This has a direct impact on Americans' grocery costs: The U.S. sugar program "creates higher sugar prices, which cost consumers more than producers benefit, at an annual cost to the economy of around $1 billion per year," according to a 2023 report by the Government Accountability Office. "The program also restricts the amount of sugar entering the U.S….using a method based on 40-year-old data that doesn't reflect current market conditions. This has led to fewer sugar imports than expected."

"In the past four decades," Griswold added, "the domestic price of sugar in the United States has been almost twice as high as the average world price of sugar."

If Trump wanted to make it easier for Coca-Cola to switch back to sugar, he could call on Congress to end import quotas—and kill corn subsidies, for good measure. Unfortunately, Trump's other policies directly conflict with this goal.

"A move from HCFS to other sweeteners would provide about a 10% to 15% increase in the cost of certain products, especially beverages," Investopedia estimated earlier this year. But "one wildcard in this regard is incoming President Trump's promise of higher tariffs on cane and beet sugars from Mexico and Brazil, which would increase the prices of those sweeteners and thus the foods produced with them. This might keep HCFS economically viable as an ingredient even if it becomes moderately more expensive."

And Trump, famously skeptical of trade, has made it more difficult for the U.S. to import sugar.

"Today, the U.S. Department of Agriculture…announced no additional imports of specialty sugars beyond what U.S. international obligations dictate," the department said in a statement on July 14, which it deemed an "America First trade win."

So far, Coca-Cola has not committed to switch back to sugar, despite Trump's claim to the contrary. Ironically, Trump's policies so far make it even more difficult for the company to make that shift.