https://nypost.com/2020/09/30/subway-sandwiches-dont-meet-legal-definition-of-bread-court/?utm_source=url_sitebuttons&utm_medium=site%20buttons&utm_campaign=site%20buttons&fbclid=IwAR2dFgRVORCVdF3QBbbpiBI-52pa8-LkMmbnqLBlgquIi-yTY_St3DDF1R4
The country’s Supreme Court ruled that the starch used in Subway sandwiches is too sugary to meet the definition of “bread” — a legal distinction that would have saved the firm some dough.
In deciding whether to give the fast-food chain a tax break for serving a “staple” food item, the five-judge panel ruled that the bread’s sugar-to-flour content is roughly five times too high to qualify, according to the Irish Independent.
maybe she's born with it, maybe it's chlorine
If you're injured and need some sympathy, PM me and I'm very happy to write back.
disclaimer: PhD not MD
Quote:
Ireland’s highest court isn’t sweet on tax breaks for footlongs. The country’s Supreme Court ruled that the starch used in Subway sandwiches is too sugary to meet the definition of “bread” — a legal distinction that would have saved the firm some dough.
In deciding whether to give the fast-food chain a tax break for serving a “staple” food item, the five-judge panel ruled that the bread’s sugar-to-flour content is roughly five times too high to qualify, according to the Irish Independent.
maybe she's born with it, maybe it's chlorine
If you're injured and need some sympathy, PM me and I'm very happy to write back.
disclaimer: PhD not MD