&

SEVENTEENTH CONGRESS OF THE REPUBLIC ) Nee Oe at
OF THE PHILIPPINES
Second Regular Session ) 18 MAY 1G P3%
SENAT
5.B.no. £808

— RECSh aD

Introduced by Senator Maria Lourdes Nancy S. Binay

AN ACT

REMOVE OR EXCLUDE REFINED SUGAR FROM THE LIST OF PRODUCTS
COVERED BY MANDATORY FOOD FORTIFICATION, AMENDING FOR
THIS PURPOSE REPUBLIC ACT NO. 8976, OTHERWISE KNOWN AS THE
“FOOD FORTIFICATION ACT OF 2000”

EXPLANATORY NOTE
Under Republic Act No. (R.A.) 8976, otherwise known as the “Philippine Food
Fortification Act of 2000", refined sugar is one of the products covered by
mandatory food fortification. However, after a series of consultations between
the Bureau of Food and Drugs of the Department of Health (now the Food and
Drug Administration), sugar refineries and refined sugar re-packers, a consensus
was reached that the mandatory fortification of refined sugar is not practical and
cannot be effectively implemented due to the following constraints:

1. Sugar refineries are not the owners of raw sugar that will be processed
into refined sugar and of the resulting refined sugar. Since fortification is
an act of ownership, refineries cannot fortify the refined sugar without the
conformity of its owners, who are not willing to sign fortification
authorization letters.

2. The target sector for the Vitamin A fortification program (D and E
economic bracket) prefer to buy brown sugar over refined due to cost
consideration.



3. Fortification of refined sugar is not marketable. Industrial users such as
Coca-Cola, Pepsi, Nestle and San Miguel do not want fortified refined
sugar as it will affect the formula of their products. Industrial users
account for about 80% of the market for refined sugar.

4, Household consumers do not prefer to buy fortified refined sugar. This
was proven by a test-run conducted by Victorias Milling Company. In the
test run, 99 bags of refined sugar were fortified with Vitamin A. After
almost a week of marketing and selling the fortified refined sugar, the 99
bags remained unsold.

5, Mandatory fortification will lead to an increase in the market price of
refined sugar. The estimated increase due to fortification is P50.00/bag or
about one peso per kilo of refined sugar.

In view of these constraints in the implementation of the mandatory fortification
of refined sugar, this bill seeks to amend R.A. 8976 by removing or excluding
refined sugar from the list of products covered by mandatory food fortification.

MARIA LOURDES thncr S. BINAY

Senator



wor nner one

Bee ep eee
Raat BRERS

Pest
SEVENTEENTH CONGRESS OF THE REPUBLIC ) e, ‘eiew
OF THE PHILIPPINES ) "

Second Regular Session )
18 MAY 16 P3223
SENATE
s.B.No._1808
Rei -

Introduced by Senator Maria Lourdes Nancy S. Binay

AN ACT
REMOVE OR EXCLUDE REFINED SUGAR FROM THE LIST OF PRODUCTS
COVERED BY MANDATORY FOOD FORTIFICATION, AMENDING FOR
THIS PURPOSE REPUBLIC ACT NO. 8976, OTHERWISE KNOWN AS THE
“FOOD FORTIFICATION ACT OF 2000”

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the Philippines in
Congress assembled:

Section 1. Section 3 of Republic Act No. 8976, otherwise known as the
“Philippine Food Fortification Act of 2000” is hereby amended to delete refined
sugar from the definition of “Manufacturer”.

Sec. 2. Section 6 of the same Act is hereby amended to delete refined
sugar mutatis mutandis from the enumeration.

Sec. 3. Section 8 of the same Act is hereby amended to delete refined
sugar mutatis mutandis.

Sec. 4. Separability Clause. - If any provision or any part hereof, is held
invalid or unconstitutional, the remainder of the law or the provision not
otherwise affected shall remain valid and subsisting.

Sec. 5. Repealing Clause. — All other laws, decrees, executive orders,
proclamations, and administrative regulations or parts thereof inconsistent
herewith are hereby repealed or modified accordingly.

1



1
2
3

Sec. 6. Effectivity Clause. - This Act shall take effect fifteen (15) days
after its publication in the Official Gazette or in at least two (2) newspapers of
general circulation.

Approved,