Author: mollie-lambert

​When the UK’s new restrictions on paid advertising for high fat, salt or sugar (HFSS) and “less healthy” food (LHF) and drink products came into force in January 2026, many brands were still working through what the rules would mean in practice. Six months on, the Advertising Standards Authority’s early rulings show where the regulatory lines are being drawn.

The first decisions are important because they confirm that the HFSS legislation is not just a food advertising issue. The regulations affect retailers, agencies, influencers, ad networks, platforms and, in some cases, brands outside the food and drink sector where paid advertising features identifiable HFSS products.

A quick reminder: what do the rules do?

The restrictions apply to paid-for advertising of identifiable HFSS/LHF products. In short, any product classified as HFSS under the Nutrient Profiling Model and listed in one of 13 LHF categories cannot appear in paid-for online advertising in the UK, and can only be advertised on TV after the 9pm watershed.

The key question is whether the paid advert is for an identifiable less healthy product. That assessment is now becoming central to campaign planning, creative approvals, influencer briefs and paid media buying.

The first rulings: Lidl, Iceland and Amazon Fresh

Lidl Northern Ireland was one of the first retailers to have an ad banned under the HFSS/LHF rules after an Instagram post in partnership with influencer Emma Kearney promoted products from Lidl’s bakery range. The ASA ruled that a Pain Suisse product was identifiable and classified as less healthy, meaning the paid post breached the new rules. Lidl’s position was that the campaign was intended to be brand led, but the decision shows that brand led intent will not prevent a breach where a HFSS product is clearly identifiable.

Iceland’s banner and display advertisements on the Daily Mail website featured several products, including Swizzels, Chupa Chups and Haribo confectionery. The ASA found that these were identifiable LHF products in paid online advertising and banned the ads. Iceland explained that it had requested nutrient profile information from suppliers and was addressing gaps in its data, but this did not prevent a finding of breach.
Amazon Fresh’s Crème Egg Easter campaign highlights how seasonal, product led promotions can create particular risk. Seasonal campaigns often rely on instantly recognisable products and strong visual cues. But when it is chocolate eggs at Easter, sweets at Halloween or party food at Christmas, those cues make an HFSS product identifiable in paid media and that is where the compliance risk arises - the fact that the wider campaign is timely, seasonal or brand-led will not necessarily reduce the risk.

What these early rulings tell us

1. Everyone has a responsibility
These rulings make clear that responsibility does not sit with food manufacturers alone. Retailers, agencies, influencers, media buyers, ad networks and platforms all have a role in ensuring compliance .

2. “Brand-led” does not equal compliant
Brands can still run paid advertising focused on brand identity, values, heritage, purpose and corporate messaging. For example, Lindt has run campaigns featuring its Master Chocolatier, which promotes the brand without referencing any specific Lindor products which would be classed as HFSS.

However, the Lidl ruling demonstrates that a campaign cannot simply be labelled “brand-led” if the creative makes a restricted product identifiable.

3. Product data is essential for compliance control
The Iceland ruling underlines the importance of accurate, up to date nutrient profiling data. For retailers and marketplaces with large product catalogues, the risk is not limited to creative teams. It extends to product databases, supplier information, data feeds and ad networks - requiring various teams to work together.

4. Identifiability is the key test
Looking ahead, the key focus will be identifiability: how far brands can go with category cues, brand assets, indirect references, packaging shapes, colours, flavours or seasonal associations before crossing the line. That will be especially important for campaigns built around recognisable products, mascots, occasions or limited-edition launches.

A welcome degree of pragmatism:
The early rulings also suggest that the ASA is not looking to ban ads where HFSS products are incidental or not identifiable. For example, a television advertisement for On the Beach showed a child placing a chocolate ring doughnut onto his plate - the complaint was not upheld as the ad was not considered to be promoting an identifiable HFSS product.

The rules are wide reaching, but they do not prevent every appearance of food in paid media. The challenge for brands is to understand when an HFSS or LHF product is merely part of the scene and when it becomes the subject/purpose of an ad.

The proposed revised Nutrient Profiling Model
Alongside the recent rulings, the Government has consulted on applying the updated Nutrient Profiling Model 2018 to advertising and promotions restrictions. The consultation opened on 25 March 2026 and closed on 17 June 2026. If implemented, the updated model is expected to bring more products within scope. For some brands, products that currently sit outside the high-risk category may need to be reassessed.

Why this is not just an FMCG issue
While the rules are mostly relevant to food and drink manufacturers and retailers, the On the Beach complaint is a useful reminder that the regime can impact other sectors. Brands outside the food and drink sector should pay close attention where their paid advertising features recognisable HFSS products.

Practical steps for in-house teams and agencies
Businesses should treat HFSS compliance as part of campaign planning from the outset. In practice, that means:
• Know which products are in scope and keep a close eye on the proposed revisions to the Nutrient Profiling Model
• Check whether the product is identifiable
• Keep brand campaigns genuinely brand led
• Build compliance into the planning process
• Stay up to date

In summary
The first ASA rulings show that the ASA will take action where paid media clearly promotes identifiable LHF products. For brands and agencies, the safest approach is to build HFSS checks into campaign development from the outset. In most cases, the most difficult question will not be whether a product appears, but whether it is identifiable in the context of the ad.

How Brandsmiths can help
Our commercial team can help brand owners, agencies and in-house teams by:
• Understanding and applying the HFSS/LHF advertising restrictions
• Reviewing current and planned marketing campaigns for risk
• Identifying high risk areas across paid media
• Designing internal compliance and approval frameworks, brand-safe guidelines, and training on compliance and practical implementation

Need help navigating the restrictions? Contact Mollie Lambert at mollie@brandsmiths.co.uk for a free consultation.