When is chocolate not chocolate?

When there is no sugar in it but instead sweetners!

This is the latest interpretation of

The Cocoa and Chocolate Products Regulations 2003

SI No. 1659

If there is no sugar but sweetners are used instead then in does not meet the requirements of the "reserved descriptions" which include milk chocolate.

To my mind that is wrong as the key factor should surely be whether there is cocoa in it in some shape or form.

Crazy?

I believe Milk chocolate should have a minimum of 30% cocoa solids and Plain Chocolate 65%. 

[kevvosa]

I believe Milk chocolate should have a minimum of 30% cocoa solids and Plain Chocolate 65%. 

But what do you believe about the sugar content? That is what's in
question here. Personally I don't think it should matter if sugar or
sweetener is used, as long as it tastes good.

I think chocolate should use sugar.  However I can understand that some people might have conditions, which mean they can't eat sugar so that should allow for artifiial sweeteners.

I think chocolate should use sugar. 

Ah!

Chocolate should use sugar?

It isn't chocolate if there is no sugar in it!

Black-Knight38906.5274074074

But you said the cocoa content was the important thing. Make up your mind!

bounty hunter38906.5359027778

You didn't get my point, Bounty.

You called it chocolate anyway.

The regs would make you say "the product with sugar in it is chocolate."

Your statement as far as the EU is concerned says

"The product with cocoa and sugar in it should use sugar."

Do you get my drift?

Not really. 

[loulou]

It seems pretty straightforward to me.

Of course it does.

[kevvosa]

It's a tongue twister.