Confectionery fraud surges as manufacturers struggle to stay ahead

Confectionery fraud: overview

• Confectionery fraud is rising globally
• Risks span cocoa, nuts, honey, colours, flavours and gelatine ingredients
• Ingredient substitution and false claims occur throughout supply chains
• Fraud increasingly threatens consumer safety through undeclared allergens and mislabelling
• Manufacturers combine testing, traceability and audits to reduce risks

Cases of confectionery fraud are growing worldwide, with rising cocoa prices, supply chain disruptions and increasing demand for premium ingredients creating stronger incentives for economically motivated adulteration.

And fraud can take many forms, including the substitution of cocoa butter with cheaper vegetable fats, the dilution of honey and sweeteners with low-cost syrups, counterfeit branded chocolates, and the misrepresentation of ingredient origin or quality claims.

What’s more, fraud opportunities are emerging at multiple points throughout the confectionery supply chain, with experts warning that understanding where those vulnerabilities exist is crucial to managing risk.

Confectionery at risk

According to public health and safety organisation NSF, confectionery fraud falls into three main categories – upstream, mid-chain and downstream.

Upstream: The highest-value risk here is the misrepresentation of cocoa origin and sustainability status. False deforestation-free, organic, Fairtrade, and single-origin claims are becoming more attractive as the value attached to them rises.

Nut ingredients, particularly pistachios and hazelnuts, are also vulnerable to substitution, dilution and origin fraud, with lower-value varieties or alternative species passed off as premium products. Honey, vanilla, fruit preparations and natural flavourings remain equally frequent targets for adulteration and authenticity issues, especially where supply is constrained and prices are elevated.

At the same time, authenticity of gelatine used in gums, gummies and jellies remain a concern, particularly with regards to porcine versus bovine and the integrity of halal certification.

Mid-chain: The main concern at this stage is compositional substitution. This includes replacing cocoa butter with cheaper vegetable fats, diluting cocoa solids, substituting high-quality nuts such as pistachios, hazelnuts or almonds with lower-grade or alternative nut species, and replacing premium ingredients such as honey, vanilla, fruit preparations or dairy components with cheaper alternatives.

Fraud can also involve the use of colours, flavourings and texturising agents to create the impression of a higher content of premium ingredients, as well as the undeclared addition of fillers and sweeteners.

Downstream: Confectionery also has a significant counterfeit and grey-import problem. Branded confectionery is high margin, has a long shelf life and can go viral on social media fast.

But the problem isn’t limited to novelty products alone. The FSA’s 2025/26 retail surveillance survey found that some ordinary prepacked chocolate products were found to contain less cocoa solids than stated on the label. The same survey found serious problems in Dubai-style chocolate – only one of 45 samples passed every test and labelling requirement, and undeclared allergens were found in 18 samples.

These findings highlight how authenticity issues can quickly escalate beyond economic deception and become a consumer safety concern.

Consumer safety

“What makes confectionery different from many other categories is how quickly fraud can become a safety issue,” says Emma Hanby, director of food advisory and training at NSF.

In some sectors, she explains, fraud mainly costs consumers money. In confectionery, particularly where nuts, allergens and imported trend-led products are involved, it can put vulnerable consumers at real risk.

This is especially relevant as manufacturers race to capitalise on fast-growing consumer trends. The popularity of products such as Dubai-style chocolate has driven intense demand for pistachios and specialty ingredients, increasing pressure on already strained supply chains and creating opportunities for substitution and mislabelling.

For confectionery businesses, fraud prevention is therefore not just about protecting brand value, it’s about protecting the public.

The challenge to stop fraud, however, continues to grow and manufacturers are struggling to keep pace with the evolving threat.

Tackling confectionery fraud

While traceability, testing and supplier assurance remain the cornerstones of fraud prevention, manufacturers are increasingly recognising that no single tool can address every risk.

Laboratory testing continues to play a critical role, particularly where fraud leaves a measurable footprint. Manufacturers can verify cocoa content, detect the presence of non-cocoa fats in chocolate, identify nut species and use DNA-based methods to confirm the source of gelatine. When testing is targeted at known vulnerabilities, it can provide strong evidence that ingredients match their specification.

However, testing has limitations. Many of the claims that add value to confectionery products, such as organic, single-origin or deforestation-free, can’t be conclusively proven through routine laboratory analysis alone. While advanced techniques can sometimes help investigate geographic origin, the results aren’t always definitive.

As a result, companies are placing greater emphasis on traceability. Yet visibility often declines further upstream in the supply chain. Manufacturers may have detailed oversight of their direct suppliers, but less visibility into traders, aggregators and processors further back, particularly in complex commodity supply chains such as cocoa.

Supplier assurance is therefore evolving beyond questionnaires and paperwork reviews. Increasingly, manufacturers are seeking independent verification through unannounced audits, certification checks, mass-balance assessments and targeted testing programmes. These measures can help confirm that the volumes and claims entering a supply chain align with the products ultimately reaching consumers.

According to Hanby, fraud prevention is most effective when companies combine testing, traceability and supplier verification rather than relying on any one measure in isolation. And particular attention should be paid when sourcing from new suppliers, changing supply routes or making premium claims around origin, sustainability or production methods.

Most manufacturers already conduct formal vulnerability assessments as part of their food safety and certification programmes. The challenge, she says, is ensuring those assessments remain current, evidence-based and are actively informing procurement and risk-management decisions as market conditions evolve.

As supply chains become more complex and premium ingredients more valuable, ensuring fraud prevention keeps pace with evolving risks will remain a critical challenge for the confectionery industry.