Trade Policy Just Changed the Formulation Playbook (Again)
Summary
In The Erythritol Reckoning, Part II, Thom King moves beyond last week’s science debate and into the economic earthquake now reshaping formulation strategy. With final antidumping and countervailing duties of up to nearly 200% on Chinese erythritol, what was once a dependable, low-cost bulking foundation has become a structural liability
The Erythritol Reckoning Part II. This isn’t a temporary spike. It’s a permanent repricing of the U.S. market that forces brands to choose between margin erosion and reformulation. Part 2 explores how smart formulators are responding: demoting erythritol to a supporting role, reintroducing scalable polyols like maltitol and isomalt, stacking functional fibers for bulk and tolerance, and building modular sweetening systems that can flex with trade policy, pricing, and perception shifts. The message is clear: resilience now beats reliance. Read Part 1 by clicking here.
Thom King, CFS, Food Scientist
Chief Innovations Officer, Icon Foods
If you thought erythritol’s problems stopped at awkward headlines and nervous consumers, think again. The science debate was just background noise. The real disruption is economic. And it’s now official.
On February 5, 2026, the U.S. Department of Commerce issued its final affirmative antidumping (AD) and countervailing duty (CVD) determinations on erythritol from China. These aren’t trial balloons or provisional numbers. These are final margins, enforceable at the dock. And they change everything.
The Trade Reality (This Time It’s Locked In)
Commerce finalized dumping margins ranging from 85.04% to 184.26%, with additional subsidy rates of 4.54% to 8.63%, assessed at import as cash deposits. Layer those on top of existing Section 301 tariffs, and you’re staring at effective duty stacks well north of 100%, in some cases approaching 200%. This is no longer a “China price plus a little pain” scenario. It is a structural repricing of erythritol in the U.S. market.
From Volatile Ingredient to Structural Liability
For years, erythritol was treated like a dependable base note. Predictable. Functional. Cheap enough to build entire platforms around. That assumption is now obsolete.
This ruling does three permanent things:
- It prices most Chinese-origin erythritol out of the U.S. market.
Any supply that does arrive will be opportunistic, inconsistent, and unsuitable for long-term planning. Think $7-$9 per KG. - It resets the global price floor.
Domestic and non-China producers now anchor pricing. Even if supply expands, prices do not revert to 2023 levels. - It forces formulators into strategic choices.
You can either redesign now or absorb margin erosion later. There is no third option.
Erythritol hasn’t disappeared. But it has lost its privileged position.
The Quiet Irony
Here’s what no one wants to say out loud: there is no scalable U.S. erythritol capacity ready to replace China overnight. So the burden doesn’t land on foreign producers. It lands squarely on CPG brands and formulators, who are now paying the price for a global supply chain that optimized for cost instead of resilience. If erythritol still represents the backbone of your bulking system, your formulation is now economically fragile.
Science Didn’t Kill Erythritol, But It Didn’t Save It Either
The recent wave of studies linking erythritol to cardiovascular risk, platelet activity, and potential neurological effects didn’t need to be conclusive. They only needed to introduce uncertainty. In consumer markets, perception compounds faster than peer review.
When higher prices collide with health ambiguity, ingredients don’t get the benefit of the doubt. They get replaced.
What Smart Formulators Are Doing Instead
The best brands aren’t panicking. They’re rebalancing.
1. Demoting Erythritol, Not Eliminating It
Erythritol still has value. But at lower inclusion levels, supported by:
- Allulose for sugar-like behavior
- Soluble fibers for bulk and viscosity
- Glycerin for mouthfeel and humectancy
Less erythritol per serving means less exposure to tariffs, volatility, and consumer skepticism.
2. Revisiting Polyols That Actually Scale
This is where maltitol and isomalt quietly re-enter the conversation.
For years, they were sidelined by the “erythritol-first” mindset. That era is over.
Maltitol
- Excellent bulking and crystallization properties
- Familiar processing behavior in confectionery, baked goods, and coatings
- Partial digestibility, yes—but manageable with smart dosing and fiber pairing
- Far more economically stable and globally diversified than erythritol
Isomalt
- Lower hygroscopicity
- Exceptional stability in hard candies and compressed systems
- Minimal cooling effect compared to erythritol
- Slow digestion profile that plays well in reduced-sugar confections
Are these zero-calorie? No. Are they functional, scalable, and predictable? Absolutely.
For many applications, a maltitol or isomalt base blended with allulose, fiber, and HIS now makes far more economic sense than chasing tariff-burdened erythritol.
3. Fiber as a Structural Ingredient, Not a Claim Add-On
Soluble tapioca fiber, PHGG, acacia, FOS, IMO blends—these are now doing real work:
- Replacing lost solids
- Softening sweetness curves
- Supporting digestive tolerance
- Improving label narratives
Fiber stacking is becoming the unsung hero of post-erythritol formulation.
4. Sweetness Synergy Over Sweetness Dependence
High-purity stevia, monk fruit, and sweetness modulators like thaumatin are being used with intent:
- Lower total sweetener load
- Cleaner temporal profiles
- Better cost-in-use
The goal is efficiency, not intensity.
5. Modular Formulation Is the New Gold Standard
The most future-proof products today are modular systems, not fixed recipes.
If erythritol pencils out? Use it. If pricing blows up? Swap in a maltitol–fiber or isomalt–allulose platform without starting from scratch.
Formulation agility is now a competitive advantage.
Where Erythritol Actually Lands
Let’s be honest. Erythritol isn’t dead. But it is no longer the hero but not a zero. It’s a situational tool, not a foundation. A supporting actor, not the lead. Brands that cling to erythritol-centric designs will face:
- Margin compression
- Supply uncertainty
- Increasing consumer friction
Brands that diversify will survive—and likely outperform.
The Icon Foods Perspective
This moment validates what we’ve believed for years: single-ingredient strategies are fragile. At Icon Foods, we’ve built platforms, not bets:
- Allulose systems
- Maltitol and isomalt solutions
- Stevia and monk fruit blends
- Soluble fiber stacks
- Sweetness modulators that clean up the curve
Not because erythritol was “bad,” but because dependency is expensive when the world changes. And the world just changed.
Final Word to Formulators
If erythritol is still your Plan A, you don’t have a strategy. You have a vulnerability. The future of better-for-you formulation isn’t about finding the next silver bullet. It’s about resilient systems that survive trade policy, science cycles, and consumer sentiment.
Reformulate now. Diversify intelligently. Or let economics do it for you, at a much higher cost.
At Icon Foods, we’re already helping brands make the transition. Let’s build your next-generation formulation before the next ruling drops.
Reach out to your Icon Foods representative for sweeteners, fibers and modulator, samples, documentation formulation and usage guidance.
Since 1999 Icon Foods has been your reliable supply chain partner for sweeteners, fibers, sweetening systems, inclusions and sweetness modulators.
Taste the Icon difference.
Order Samples
