SoylentNews

upstart writes in with an IRC submission for Fnord666:

For Subway, A Ruling Not So Sweet. Irish Court Says Its Bread Isn't Bread:

In a decision shocking to those familiar with the $5 footlong, Ireland's Supreme Court has ruled: Subway bread isn't actually bread.

At least, not legally.

That's because its bread has too much sugar, the court said Tuesday. The country's Value-Added Tax Act of 1972 says tax-exempt bread can't have sugar, fat and bread improver exceed 2% of the weight of flour.

In Subway's recipe, sugar makes up 10% of the weight of the flour, according to the judgment. That's five times what the law deems acceptable.

[...] "The resulting product falls outside the definition of 'bread' for the purposes of the Act," the ruling said. Five judges considered the case.

[...] An Irish Subway franchisee, Bookfinders Ltd., prompted this legal interpretation after it sought a tax break for some of its menu items.

The country allows "staple" foods, which include bread, to have value-added taxes set at 0%. The franchisee originally submitted a claim in 2006, asking for a refund for some of the value-added taxes it paid in 2004 and 2005.

[...] "Subway's bread is, of course, bread. We have been baking fresh bread in our restaurants for more than three decades and our guests return each day for sandwiches made on bread that smells as good as it tastes," a Subway spokesperson said in a statement. The company says it's reviewing the ruling.

A 6-inch Subway bread roll contains 3 to 5 grams of sugar, except for gluten-free, which has 7, according to data from the company.

Original Submission