‘Sugar-free’ on a food supplement
Annex conditions of Regulation 1924/2006 and Article 7 nutrition information — what is measured per 100 g and what per daily portion?

“Sugar-free” on a food supplement is the nutrition claim SUGARS-FREE from the Annex to Regulation (EC) No 1924/2006. It may be used only where the product contains no more than 0.5 g of sugars per 100 g (or 100 ml), calculated on the food ready for consumption, not on the daily portion. “With no added sugars” is a different claim with a different condition. It turns on composition, not on the analytical result: no mono- or disaccharides have been added, not even as a carrier in a vitamin premix, and no other food has been used for its sweetening properties. Both claims trigger Article 7 of the Regulation. For a food supplement that means numerical information under Article 8 of Directive 2002/46/EC per portion recommended for daily consumption, not the nutrition declaration table of Regulation 1169/2011.

1. The three sugar claims and their conditions

Article 8(1) of Regulation 1924/2006 permits nutrition claims only if they are listed in the Annex and comply with its conditions. For sugars the Annex has three stand-alone entries and one comparative entry. Each also covers “any claim likely to have the same meaning for the consumer”. “Sugar free”, “0% sugar”, “zero sugar”, a Polish “bez cukru” and a crossed-out sugar-cube pictogram are therefore all assessed under SUGARS-FREE. A pictorial or graphic representation is itself a claim (Art. 2(2)(1)).

Two further points from the same Annex. Where a food naturally meets the condition, the term “naturally” may be used as a prefix, e.g. “naturally sugars-free”. A trade mark or brand name that may be construed as a nutrition claim, e.g. “ZeroSugar Vit”, may be used only if it is accompanied on the same label by a related claim that complies with the Regulation (Art. 1(3)). A brand name therefore does not lift the 0.5 g threshold.

The Regulation covers claims in labelling, presentation and advertising (Art. 1(2)). A web-shop product page, a marketplace listing and an advertising visual are subject to the same conditions as the pack.

2. What counts as “sugars” and what does not

Article 2(1)(c) of Regulation 1924/2006 refers to the definitions in Directive 90/496/EEC. That Directive was repealed by Regulation 1169/2011, and references to it are construed as references to the FIC Regulation (Art. 53(2) FIC). “Sugars” therefore means all monosaccharides and disaccharides present in food, but excludes polyols (Annex I point 8 FIC). Polyols are alcohols containing more than two hydroxyl groups (point 9). Polyols are included in “carbohydrate” (point 7) but not in “sugars”.

The definition is chemical, not functional. Dextrose used as a tablet filler, lactose as a diluent, sucrose in a dragée coating and isomaltulose (a disaccharide) are sugars whatever the reason they were added. Maltodextrin and oligofructose are not sugars as such, but they contain a fraction of free glucose, maltose or fructose. That fraction shows up in the sugars analysis.

3. The 0.5 g per 100 g threshold: product mass, not daily portion

The conditions for SUGARS-FREE and LOW SUGARS refer to 100 g or 100 ml. The Annex has no separate “per portion” basis for food supplements. What decides is the concentration of sugars in the product mass, not the absolute amount in two gummies. A small portion does not help: a 2.5 g gummy with 0.5 g of sugars contains 20 g of sugars per 100 g, forty times the SUGARS-FREE limit.

Article 5(3) adds a second rule: claims refer to the food ready for consumption in accordance with the manufacturer’s instructions. This matters for effervescent tablets and sachet powders that the label says to dissolve in water. The food ready for consumption is then the drink, and the condition is calculated per 100 ml.

Example C shows that SUGARS-FREE and WITH NO ADDED SUGARS can diverge. The first claim is quantitative; the second concerns composition. If the label gives no unambiguous preparation instruction, the basis remains the product as sold.

4. “With no added sugars”: composition, carriers and sweeteners

The condition has two limbs with different structures. The first excludes any added mono- or disaccharide. It has neither a quantitative threshold nor a functional test. The qualifier “used for its sweetening properties” applies only to the second limb, “any other food”: honey, juice concentrates, sweet fruit powders. Consequences for food supplements:

• Carriers in compound ingredients. Beadlet and powder forms of vitamins (e.g. vitamin D₃, vitamin A, vitamin K₂) are sometimes produced on sucrose or glucose. Sugar brought in by such a preparation is sugar added to the supplement: it is not naturally present in it, it enters with the recipe. The Annex contains no carry-over rule of the kind Article 18 of Regulation 1333/2008 provides for additives. The carrier composition therefore needs a supplier declaration before marketing uses “no added sugars”.
• Tableting excipients. Lactose, direct-compression dextrose and sucrose in a coating exclude this claim even where the analytical result is within the SUGARS-FREE threshold.
• Naturally occurring sugars. Where sugars are naturally present, e.g. in a fruit powder added as a vitamin C source, the Annex provides for the statement ‘CONTAINS NATURALLY OCCURRING SUGARS’. The English version says “should also appear”, the Polish “powinna się również znaleźć”. The statement is nevertheless part of the conditions of use in the Annex, and Article 8(1) permits only claims “in conformity with the conditions”. It is safer to treat it as mandatory.

Polyols and intense sweeteners. The Annex does not say expressly whether a food additive in the sweetener class is “any other food used for its sweetening properties”. Three provisions point to “no”:

1. Article 7(a) of Regulation 1333/2008 admits sweeteners to the Union list precisely to replace sugars in the production of food “with no added sugars”.
2. Article 3(2)(e) of that Regulation defines food with no added sugars as food without added mono- or disaccharides and without added food containing mono- or disaccharides used for its sweetening properties. Sucralose and steviol glycosides contain neither. Polyols are by definition not “sugars”.
3. Annex III FIC distinguishes in point 2.1 foods containing sweeteners (‘with sweetener(s)’) and in point 2.2 foods containing “both an added sugar or sugars and a sweetener or sweeteners” (‘with sugar(s) and sweetener(s)’). The legislator thus assumes that a product sweetened only with additives has no added sugar.

A sweetener therefore does not exclude WITH NO ADDED SUGARS, but it triggers its own labelling duties. The 10% polyol threshold is covered in our article on the laxative-effect warning.

In categories 17.1 (food supplements supplied in a solid form) and 17.2 (supplied in a liquid form) of Annex II Part E to Regulation 1333/2008, sweeteners are not restricted to “energy-reduced or with no added sugars” products, a restriction found in many other categories. A supplement may therefore contain both sugar and a sweetener, and the sugar claim depends solely on the conditions of Regulation 1924/2006. Limits for food supplements vary with the form:

Source: Annex II Part E to Reg. 1333/2008, consolidated text 02008R1333-20260818. The other sweeteners in category 17 (E 952, E 954, E 957, E 959, E 961, E 962, E 969) have their own limits under the same subdivisions.

5. Article 7: which nutrition information a supplement with a sugar claim needs

Article 7 of Regulation 1924/2006 (as replaced by Article 49 FIC) has three layers. First, nutrition labelling of products bearing a nutrition or health claim is mandatory, with the exception of generic advertising, covering the particulars of Article 30(1) FIC. Second, the amount of a substance to which the claim relates that does not appear in that labelling is stated in the same field of vision. Third, the last sentence reads: “In the case of food supplements, the nutrition information shall be provided in accordance with Article 8 of Directive 2002/46/EC.”

Article 29(1)(a) FIC excludes food supplements from the section on the mandatory nutrition declaration. A “sugar-free” claim on a supplement therefore does not require a table with energy, fat, saturates, carbohydrate, sugars, protein and salt. It requires information under Article 8 of the Directive: in numerical form (para. 1), per portion of the product recommended for daily consumption (para. 2), and for vitamins and minerals also as a percentage of the reference values (para. 3). The values are averages based on the manufacturer’s analysis (Art. 9(1)).

Open question: must the amount of sugars be declared? Article 8(1) of the Directive concerns “nutrients or substances with a nutritional or physiological effect”. “Nutrients” within Article 2(b) of the Directive are only vitamins and minerals. Read literally, a supplement with a sugar claim need not declare sugars. A purposive reading points the other way. Article 7 makes the information mandatory because of the claim, and the supplements sentence changes its format rather than removing the obligation. In Regulation 1924/2006, sugars are a “nutrient” (Art. 2(2)(2): carbohydrate and its components). Neither argument has been settled by the CJEU or by an implementing act. Safe practice: state sugars numerically per daily portion and, voluntarily, per 100 g as well, because that is the unit in which the claim condition is measured. Such additional information must not mislead (Art. 36(2) FIC).

6. Official control: how a result near 0.5 g is read

The Commission guidance on tolerances of December 2012 (a document without formal legal status) has a separate section 5 for nutrients and substances that are the subject of a claim. Its Table 3 expressly covers “foods and food supplements”. The SUGARS-FREE condition is a maximum level, so two rules apply:

• Point 5.1. For deviations towards the maximum, only the measurement uncertainty is applied.
• Point 5.3 and Example 6. Where the declared value sits so close to the threshold that the ordinary tolerance would cross it, the tolerance is applied to the threshold itself. For LOW SUGARS, Example 6 sets the upper bound at 5.0 g/100 g, with no further allowance for uncertainty. For SUGARS-FREE the analogous bound is 0.5 g/100 g.

In operational terms, design the recipe with a margin below 0.5 g/100 g and confirm it by analysing the finished product, not just by calculation from raw-material specifications. A calculation misses sugars brought in by polyol syrups, fruit powders and maltodextrin. In liquid and acidic products, part of the inulin or oligofructose may hydrolyse to fructose and glucose during storage. The end-of-shelf-life value may be higher than the value at production.

The rounding guidelines (section 6) allow “0 g” or “<0.5 g” of sugars to be declared where the concentration does not exceed 0.5 g per 100 g. That rule concerns per-100 g information in foods covered by the FIC table. There is no rounding rule for a supplement’s per-daily-portion value. Stating the actual value (e.g. 0.015 g in 2 gummies) avoids the question.

7. The boundary with health claims and with misleading information

“Sugar-free” is a nutrition claim. Where the label links the absence of sugar to health, e.g. “sugar-free, so kind to teeth” or “does not raise blood sugar”, it becomes a health claim (Art. 2(2)(5)). Such a claim must come from the Union list. Regulation 432/2012 contains two claims for “sugar replacers” (intense sweeteners, xylitol, sorbitol, mannitol, maltitol, lactitol, isomalt, erythritol, sucralose, polydextrose; D-tagatose and isomaltulose) with separate conditions:

• “Consumption of foods/drinks containing <name of sugar replacer> instead of sugar induces a lower blood glucose rise after their consumption compared to sugar-containing foods/drinks”. Sugars must be replaced so that the food contains reduced amounts of sugars by at least the amount referred to in the REDUCED claim, i.e. 30%.
• “Consumption of foods/drinks containing <name of sugar replacer> instead of sugar contributes to the maintenance of tooth mineralisation”. The condition is that consumption does not lower plaque pH below 5.7 during and up to 30 minutes after consumption.

The sugar-free chewing gum claims, e.g. “Sugar-free chewing gum contributes to the maintenance of tooth mineralization”, may be used only for chewing gum that meets the SUGARS-FREE condition. They cannot be transferred to gummies or lozenges.

A separate risk is Article 7(1)(c) FIC. Information is misleading where it suggests that the food possesses special characteristics when in fact all similar foods possess them, in particular by specifically emphasising the absence of certain ingredients. A fish-oil capsule or a vitamin D in oil prominently labelled “sugar-free” is the typical case. The Annex offers a tool for this: the prefix “naturally”, which tells the consumer the characteristic stems from the nature of the product.

8. Poland: the GIS notification and label changes

The notification of first placing a food supplement on the Polish market includes a model of the labelling in Polish and the quantitative composition (Art. 29(2)(3) and (6) of the Act on food and nutrition safety, consolidated text Dz.U. 2023 item 1448, as amended). The sugar claim is therefore visible to the Chief Sanitary Inspector from day one, and the quantitative composition allows the WITH NO ADDED SUGARS condition to be assessed. The notification is not an authorisation and does not confirm that the claim complies with Regulation 1924/2006.

According to the GIS notice of 18 December 2024, a “change of nutrition claims” is a technical labelling change that does not require a new notification. A new notification is needed where there is a complete change of the active substances, the name, the classification or other parameters that may change the physiological or nutritional properties or the intended use. Adding or removing “sugar-free” as such is therefore a technical change. A reformulation that leads to the claim (e.g. replacing glucose syrup with maltitol), however, changes the quantitative composition and the nutritional value. It has to be assessed against the GIS criterion of “parameters that may change the nutritional properties”. The notice gives no answer for that case. Where a notification on file contains an outdated label, GIS provides for a correction request signed by an authorised person. The procedure is covered in our article on GIS notification of food supplements.

9. What the legislation leaves open

• Sweeteners and “any other food”. The systematic reading (section 4) supports the view that sweetener additives do not exclude WITH NO ADDED SUGARS. The wording of the Annex does not settle it expressly.
• Declaring sugars on a supplement. The last sentence of Article 7 refers to Article 8 of the Directive, which speaks of vitamins, minerals and other substances. Whether sugars must be declared is disputed (section 5).
• Maltodextrin and oligosaccharides. They are not mono- or disaccharides but contain a fraction of them. The act does not say whether adding maltodextrin as a carrier is “adding” the sugars it contains. Their amount in the analytical result counts towards the 0.5 g threshold in any event.
• Products to be dissolved. Article 5(3) points to the food ready for consumption. The act does not address labels that allow several preparations (e.g. “in 150–250 ml of water”). A cautious approach calculates for the smallest volume.
• “Should” for naturally occurring sugars. The ‘contains naturally occurring sugars’ statement is worded more softly than the other conditions. No case law weakens it.

10. Checklist before using “sugar-free” on a supplement

1. Choose the right claim: SUGARS-FREE (quantity), WITH NO ADDED SUGARS (composition), LOW SUGARS. Map every synonym and pictogram to one Annex entry.
2. Fix the calculation basis: 100 g of a solid product, or 100 ml of the drink prepared according to the instructions (Art. 5(3)).
3. Analyse the finished product (mono- and disaccharides, excluding polyols), with a margin below 0.5 g/100 g at the end of shelf life.
4. Recipe audit for “no added sugars”: supplier declarations on carriers in premixes and vitamin preparations, tableting excipients, coatings, flavourings and fruit powders.
5. Statements from the Annex and FIC: ‘contains naturally occurring sugars’; ‘with sweetener(s)’ accompanying the name; the phenylalanine statement; the warning above 10% polyols.
6. Article 7 information: values under Article 8 of Directive 2002/46/EC per daily portion; sugars numerically per portion, voluntarily also per 100 g.
7. No health shortcuts: “for teeth”, “for diabetics”, “does not raise glucose” only in the wording and under the conditions of Reg. 432/2012.
8. Polish market: an up-to-date label model in the GIS notification; for a reformulation, an assessment under the GIS notice of 18.12.2024; the same conditions on the web-shop product page.

Frequently asked questions

Can a food supplement carry a “sugar-free” claim?

Yes, if it contains no more than 0.5 g of sugars per 100 g or 100 ml of the food ready for consumption. “Sugar-free” has the same meaning as the SUGARS-FREE entry in the Annex to Regulation 1924/2006. The threshold is calculated per 100 g, not per daily portion.

Do polyols and sweeteners count as sugars?

No. “Sugars” are mono- and disaccharides excluding polyols (Annex I point 8 FIC). Sweeteners do, however, require ‘with sweetener(s)’ accompanying the name, and more than 10% added polyols requires the laxative-effect warning.

Does sucrose used as a vitamin carrier exclude “with no added sugars”?

Yes, on the wording of the Annex. The condition excludes any added mono- or disaccharide, with no quantitative threshold and regardless of technological function. The Annex makes no exception for sugar brought in by a compound ingredient.

Does a sugar claim require a nutrition table on a food supplement?

Not the full FIC table. For food supplements, Article 7 of Regulation 1924/2006 refers to Article 8 of Directive 2002/46/EC: numerical values per portion recommended for daily consumption. Safe practice is to state the amount of sugars per daily portion and, voluntarily, per 100 g.

Does adding “sugar-free” to the label require a new GIS notification in Poland?

According to the GIS notice of 18.12.2024, a change of nutrition claims is a technical labelling change and does not require a new notification. A reformulation that changes the nutritional value is assessed separately under the criteria of that notice.

Glossary

Sugars

All monosaccharides and disaccharides present in food, excluding polyols (Annex I point 8 FIC, applied through Art. 2(1)(c) of Reg. 1924/2006 and Art. 53(2) FIC).

Nutrition claim

A claim that a food has particular beneficial nutritional properties due to a nutrient it does not contain or contains in reduced proportions (Art. 2(2)(4) of Reg. 1924/2006).

Food ready for consumption

The form to which a claim refers: as prepared according to the manufacturer’s instructions (Art. 5(3)).

Portion recommended for daily consumption

The basis of the numerical declaration on a food supplement (Art. 8(2) of Directive 2002/46/EC). It is not the basis of the SUGARS-FREE and LOW SUGARS conditions.

Conclusion

On a food supplement, “sugar-free” means SUGARS-FREE: no more than 0.5 g of mono- and disaccharides per 100 g, or per 100 ml of the product prepared according to the instructions. Polyols and sweeteners do not count. WITH NO ADDED SUGARS is a composition condition that excludes any added sugar, including in a premix carrier, lactose and tableting dextrose. Sweeteners do not exclude it but require a statement accompanying the name. Article 7 of Regulation 1924/2006 does not carry the FIC nutrition table over to supplements. It refers to Article 8 of Directive 2002/46/EC. The safest course is to state sugars numerically per daily portion and voluntarily per 100 g, and, for a reformulation on the Polish market, to run it through the criteria of the GIS notice of 18.12.2024.

Primary sources

1. Regulation (EC) No 1924/2006 on nutrition and health claims made on foods: Art. 1(2)–(3), Art. 2, 5(3), 7, 8, 9; Annex (LOW SUGARS, SUGARS-FREE, WITH NO ADDED SUGARS, REDUCED, NATURALLY/NATURAL); consolidated text 02006R1924-20141213.
2. Commission Regulation (EU) No 1047/2012 amending the Annex to Reg. 1924/2006 (energy condition for “reduced sugars”).
3. Directive 2002/46/EC on food supplements: Art. 2, 8, 9; consolidated text 02002L0046-20251126.
4. Regulation (EU) No 1169/2011 (FIC): Art. 7(1)(c), 29(1)(a), 30, 36, 49, 53; Annex I points 7–9; Annex III points 2.1–2.4; consolidated text 02011R1169-20250401.
5. Regulation (EC) No 1333/2008 on food additives: Art. 3(2)(e), 7, 18; Annex II Part C (Group IV) and Part E categories 17.1–17.2; consolidated text 02008R1333-20260818.
6. Commission Regulation (EU) No 432/2012: claims for sugar replacers (blood glucose, tooth mineralisation) and for sugar-free chewing gum.
7. European Commission, Guidance document … with regard to the setting of tolerances for nutrient values declared on a label, December 2012: sections 5.1–5.4, Table 3, Example 6, section 6.
8. European Commission, Guidance on the implementation of Regulation No 1924/2006 … Conclusions of the Standing Committee, 14.12.2007.
9. Polish Act of 25 August 2006 on food and nutrition safety, consolidated text Dz.U. 2023 item 1448, as amended: Art. 29.
10. Główny Inspektorat Sanitarny (Polish Chief Sanitary Inspectorate), information on changes to a notification of first placing on the market, 18.12.2024 (in Polish).