A paid-for Thorntons Instagram advert featuring a chocolate egg has been cleared by the Advertising Standards Authority (ASA), in a ruling that provides further insight into how the new restrictions on advertising less healthy food products are being applied.
The ASA ruled that the advert did not breach the rules because, although it featured a realistic image of a chocolate egg, the product shown was not identifiable as a specific Thorntons less healthy food product.
The ruling comes as retailers and food businesses continue to adjust to the new restrictions, which came into force on 5 January 2026 and prevent paid-for advertising of identifiable less healthy food and drink products online.
The advert, seen on Instagram on 22 March, featured an image of a milk chocolate egg alongside the messages “OUR ICONIC EGGS” and “GET 10% OFF”, as well as the Thorntons branding.
The complaint was brought by campaign group Bite Back, which challenged whether the paid-for advert was for an identifiable less healthy food product placed on the internet.
Ferrero UK argued that the advert was a brand advertisement rather than an advertisement for a specific HFSS product.
The company said the Thorntons brand covered a wide range of chocolate and confectionery products and that seven different chocolate eggs were available in its range at the time. These included Dinosaur, Unicorn, Marvellous Magnificent, Iceable Milk, Classic, Continental and Viennese eggs.
Ferrero UK said the egg pictured in the advert was deliberately generic and did not depict any specific product from Thorntons range.
The ASA accepted the argument.
It confirmed that all seven Thorntons chocolate eggs were classified as HFSS and fell within the relevant confectionery category. However, it found that the chocolate egg shown in the advert did not match any of the specific products closely enough to make it identifiable.
The regulator compared the advert's image with photographs of all seven products, noting differences in texture, markings, motifs and indentations.
In particular, the egg shown in the advert had a distinctive textured surface but no patterns, markings or indentations. While the Marvellous Magnificent egg had a similar colour and texture, it featured flower and beading patterns and a large indentation bearing the Thorntons name.
As a result, the ASA concluded that the advert did not depict a specific less healthy Thorntons product and was not visually indistinguishable from one.
It therefore qualified as a brand advertisement and fell outside the scope of CAP Code rule 15.19, which prohibits payment for identifiable less healthy food and drink products to be placed on the internet.
The ASA said no further action was necessary.
The ruling provides a useful distinction for retailers and suppliers navigating the new rules: brand advertising can remain exempt, but an advert can fall within the restrictions if it identifies a specific HFSS product, including through sufficiently distinctive product imagery.
The decision follows a recent ASA ruling against Costcutter, which highlighted the other side of the line under the new HFSS advertising restrictions. In that case, the regulator upheld a complaint over advertising that featured an identifiable less healthy product, demonstrating that convenience retailers are also directly exposed to the new rules when promoting HFSS products through paid-for online advertising.
The ruling marked the first time a convenience retailer has been found in breach of the regulations, which are designed to reduce children's exposure to advertising for less healthy foods.
Earlier this year, Lidl and Iceland Foods became the first retailers to have adverts banned under the new regime, while more recently the ASA ruled against an Easter-themed Instagram campaign by Amazon Fresh and an Instagram advert for M&M's.