New UK restrictions on advertising foods high in fat, salt and sugar (HFSS) could affect just 1 per cent of total industry marketing spend once brands adjust their strategies, according to new analysis.

Research from innovation foundation Nesta suggests significant loopholes in the legislation may allow most advertising budgets to shift into channels that fall outside the scope of the rules.

The UK government introduced the new HFSS advertising restrictions on January 5 2026, banning paid online adverts and television advertising before 9pm for certain unhealthy food products. The rules apply to 13 food and drink categories, including crisps, sweet biscuits and ready meals, and were designed to reduce children’s exposure to junk food marketing.

However, Nesta’s analysis indicates the practical impact on food and drink advertising may be far smaller than expected.

Total UK food and drink advertising spend reached around £2.4bn in 2024. Of this, the organisation estimates that just 8 per cent (approximately £190 million) currently falls within the scope of the regulations.

As food brands and retailers adapt by shifting budgets into unregulated channels or focusing more on brand-led campaigns, the share of affected spend could fall to just 1 per cent, or roughly £20 million.

Loopholes could limit impact

The report highlights several gaps in the current legislation that could limit its effectiveness.

The restrictions only apply to paid online and television advertising, meaning other channels such as outdoor advertising, brand-owned social media accounts, websites and direct digital marketing are not included.

Brand and product range advertising is also exempt from the rules following industry lobbying. Nesta estimates that 36 per cent of food and drink advertising spend (around £824 million) is already brand-focused and therefore unaffected by the legislation.

The scope of the product categories included in the rules is another limitation. While the policy covers 13 HFSS categories, many commonly consumed foods considered unhealthy, such as chocolate spreads and toffee-coated nuts, fall outside the regulations.

Nesta estimates that more than 60 per cent of consumer spending on HFSS products sits outside the categories covered by the legislation.

Shifts in the advertising landscape

The research also highlights how the advertising landscape has changed since the policy was first proposed almost a decade ago.

Television advertising, one of the key channels targeted by the restrictions, has declined significantly in recent years. In real terms, TV advertising spend has fallen by around 40 per cent between 2004 and 2024, including a 21 per cent drop since the regulations were first announced in 2018.

By contrast, outdoor advertising has grown substantially over the same period, more than tripling in real terms since 2004 and increasing by 59 per cent since the policy was first proposed.

The report also highlights the role of direct digital marketing. Messages sent via email, app notifications and SMS (channels controlled directly by brands) fall outside the current restrictions.

Nesta’s analysis found that such marketing was more prevalent in the most deprived areas, where 65 per cent of direct messages came from less healthy food brands, compared with 45 per cent in the least deprived areas.

Calls for tighter regulation

John Barber, director of Nesta’s healthy life mission, said the delays and amendments to the policy risk undermining its effectiveness.

“This policy was first announced eight years ago and in that time there have been eight consultations and four delays,” he said.

“Partly due to pressure from the industry, these delays and adjustments mean that the restrictions intended to keep us healthy are operating at a fraction of their potential.”

Barber said closing the identified loopholes could significantly increase the impact of the policy. Nesta estimates that expanding the scope of the rules could raise the share of UK food advertising spend covered by the legislation to around 33 per cent.

Campaigners are also calling on the government to ensure future food policy is implemented more robustly.

Bite Back 2030 CEO D’Arcy Williams said food companies were already shifting marketing activity into areas where regulation is weaker.

“These findings back up everything we’ve been seeing and warning about for years,” she said. “Junk food companies are incredibly adept at finding loopholes and shifting their marketing into places where the rules don’t apply.”

The debate comes as the government prepares to introduce its proposed Healthy Food Standard, which will require large food businesses to meet targets on the proportion of healthier products they sell.

Subscribe to Grocery Gazette for free

Sign up here to get the latest grocery and food news each morning