Due to the high sugar content, the court has ruled that it's actually using a "confectionery" to make sandwiches, due to its high sugar content.
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/oct/01/irish-court-rules-subway-bread-is-not-bread
Have never liked their sandwiches, so now I can feel smarter?
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/oct/01/irish-court-rules-subway-bread-is-not-bread
The Guardian said:Those wrestling with the great culinary-philosophical dilemmas of our time – are jaffa cakes actually cakes or just up-themselves biscuits, is putting chorizo in paella really an act of gastronomic terrorism, and what kind of monster doesn’t love Marmite? – can give thanks to the Irish supreme court. Earlier this week, it brought clarity to an important, if less bitterly contested, debate.
In a judgment published on Tuesday, the court ruled that the bread served at Subway, the US chain that hawks giant sandwiches in 110 countries and territories, could not in fact be defined as bread because of its high sugar content.
The ruling followed an appeal by Bookfinders Ltd, Subway’s Irish franchisee. The company had argued that the bread used in Subway sandwiches counted as a staple food and was consequently exempt from VAT.
However, as the court pointed out, Ireland’s Value-Added Tax Act of 1972 draws a distinction between staple foods – bread, tea, coffee, cocoa, milk and “preparations or extracts of meat or eggs” – and “more discretionary indulgences” such as ice-cream, chocolate, pastries, crisps, popcorn and roasted nuts.
The clincher was the act’s strict provision that the amount of sugar in bread “shall not exceed 2% of the weight of flour included in the dough”.
...
Have never liked their sandwiches, so now I can feel smarter?
Last edited: