As Budget 2026 looms, junk food advertising returns to policy spotlight

“For large players like Coca-Cola and Pepsi, advertising is more about staying top-of-mind than converting non-consumers. People who don’t consume sugary drinks are unlikely to start just because of ads. Completely restricting advertising during specific hours could therefore disproportionately impact brand visibility rather than actual consumption,” says Siddharth Chandrashekhar, special public prosecutor at the Bombay High Court.

Chandrashekhar’s caution underscores the complexity of India’s junk food advertising debate. While limiting exposure is critical, experts stress that ad restrictions alone will not immediately reduce consumption.

Alay Razvi, Managing Partner at Accord Juris, adds, “A ban on junk food ads between 6 a.m. and 11 p.m. could meaningfully reduce children’s exposure to unhealthy marketing. But real public-health gains require complementary measures such as front-of-pack labels, school-zone sales restrictions, reformulation targets, nutrition education, and higher taxes on ultra-processed foods.”

Also Read: Nirmala Sitharaman Saree Today

Government measures and market context

Ahead of Budget 2026, a pre-Budget note to the Lok Sabha recommended banning junk food advertising on all media between 6 a.m. and 11 p.m., alongside tighter restrictions on marketing infant and toddler milk beverages and measures to curb childhood obesity.

The Economic Survey 2026 highlights India’s rapidly expanding ultra-processed food (UPF) market. Consumption has surged from USD 900 million in 2006 to USD 37.9 billion in 2019, growing at an annual rate exceeding 33 percent.

The Survey emphasizes the need for higher taxes on ultra-processed foods while reducing GST on healthier alternatives. It also calls for the introduction of front-of-pack labelling to make sugar, salt, and fat content more visible, restrictions on HFSS products around schools, and consumer awareness campaigns to curb diet-related diseases.

Marketing to children and misleading claims

Health influencers like Revant Himatsingka (Foodpharmer) have drawn attention to energy drinks—Sting, Red Bull, Monster—marketed near schools despite warnings stating they are not recommended for children. Caffeine content ranges from 72 mg in Sting to 160 mg in Monster, yet minors are consuming them widely.

In 2023, Himatsingka’s viral video highlighting sugar content in malted drinks such as Bournvita, Complan, Boost, and Horlicks led to NCPCR directing Mondelez India to withdraw allegedly misleading ads and packaging.

Misleading marketing extends to household brands as well, including HUL’s Kissan jams, Britannia Milk Bikis, and celebrity endorsements by Shah Rukh Khan, where campaigns suggest these snacks are “nutritious” or “immune-boosting” despite high sugar or fat content.

Manisha Kapoor, CEO and Secretary-General of ASCI, noted in 2025 in a conversation with Storyboard18 that exaggerated health claims and undisclosed influencer sponsorships remain major violations.

According to ASCI’s half-yearly complaints report 2025–26, in the food and beverage category, 61 percent of the 211 ads reviewed contained misleading health or nutrition claims.

ASCI had processed 308 cases in the food and beverage category in 2024–25, 88 percent of which were digital. The TAM AdEx report 2024 revealed that food and beverage ads represented 28 percent of celebrity endorsements while also contributing to 21 percent of total celebrity endorsement violations.

This reminds of a 2006 interview of Shah Rukh with journalist Karan Thapar, where the Bollywood superstar defended his endorsement of soft drinks, arguing, “If soft drinks are bad, ban their production. If production is not stopped due to revenue concerns, don’t stop my revenue.”

Fragmented Regulation and Fiscal Measures

Despite such warnings, regulatory enforcement remains inconsistent. Multiple authorities—FSSAI, broadcasting regulators, and consumer protection bodies—oversee different aspects, leading to fragmented oversight. Chandrashekhar observes, “This lack of a single accountable regulator weakens implementation, even though frameworks like the FSS Act, FSSAI Regulations, CPA 2019, and ASCI Code exist.”

Fiscal measures have also been uneven. While sugary drinks face 40 percent taxation, many ultra-processed foods, such as cakes, cereals, and fruit juices, are taxed at only 12–18 percent.

Dr. Arun Gupta, convenor of Nutrition Advocacy in Public Interest (NAPi), in a conversation with Storyboard18, explains, “Advertising restrictions aim to reduce exposure to misleading marketing—not to shut factories or companies. Production continues; only promotion is targeted. Evidence from countries like Chile and Mexico shows that sales decline by 20–25 percent when strict labeling and ad bans are implemented.”

Complementary Measures: Labeling and Global Examples

Chandrashekhar emphasizes that ad bans must be complemented by front-of-pack labelling. Consumers—especially young adults and senior citizens—already check nutritional information on back-of-pack labels, but placement is inconvenient. Moving this information to the front helps informed decision-making.

Globally, countries like the UK, Chile, Mexico, Norway, and South Korea have implemented advertising restrictions. The UK, for instance, banned HFSS food ads on TV before 9 p.m. Razvi notes that these measures meaningfully reduce children’s exposure, put pressure on brands to reformulate, and promote a cultural shift toward healthier defaults.

However, ad spend often migrates to packaging, influencer marketing, outdoor media, and price promotions, while smaller brands struggle to maintain visibility.

Challenges in Enforcement

Razvi highlights practical challenges. Short-term effects include softer sales in impulse-driven categories such as salty snacks, sugary beverages, and confectionery. Large diversified companies can shift budgets to compliant products, reformulate recipes, and strengthen in-store presence. Smaller or single-category brands may face sharper pressure, especially if higher taxes or sin-tax style measures raise retail prices.

Fragmented oversight, limited monitoring, and reliance on self-regulation further complicate enforcement. Digital campaigns, influencer content, rapid video formats, regional languages, and creative packaging often blur compliance lines. Even when violations are identified, takedown timelines and appeals dilute impact, encouraging repeat offenses.

Gupta notes that self-regulation has failed. “Monitoring by ASCI creates conflicts of interest. Between 2023 and 2025, authorities could not detect a single misleading ad through self-regulation.

Evidence shows consumers remain unaware of health harms, and complaint-based systems are inadequate.” He adds that fiscal measures alone have limited impact, and reducing GST on healthier products or imposing higher taxes on HFSS foods is likely to be more effective.

Path Forward: Coordinated Reform

Experts agree that effective reform requires a combination of measures. Compulsory front-of-pack warning labels should use easy-to-read symbols and standardized serving sizes. Marketing to children must be restricted, including cartoons, toys, school tie-ups, and influencer promotions.

Health and nutrition claims should be pre-cleared and strictly substantiated. A single nodal enforcement taskforce across food, media, and consumer authorities, with real-time digital monitoring and a clear escalation ladder from warnings to fines to ad embargoes for repeat offenders, is essential.

Gupta underscores that immediate priorities are legal definitions of HFSS and ultra-processed foods, labeling, and banning ads for harmful products. Companies can continue to thrive by diversifying portfolios without harming employment or revenues.

The road ahead

With Budget 2026 imminent, experts agree that advertising curbs alone will not resolve India’s nutrition crisis. However, when combined with clear front-of-pack labelling, stronger enforcement, fiscal nudges and informed consumer choice, such measures could mark a critical step in slowing the unchecked rise of ultra-processed foods—and the health risks that accompany them.