When chocolate companies change their formula.
It’s becoming an annual event that I write something about Halloween. I discussed Spirit Halloween Stores in 2024, and the economics of the holiday in 2025. This year, there have been controversies about candy. What it’s made of, how much it costs, and didn’t it used to be better?
One debate started when the heir to the candymaking Reese family accused current brand owner Hershey’s of besmirching his family’s legacy by (he claims) using cheaper ingredients for the peanut butter cups. In an open letter on LinkedIn, he claimed that the product was so bad that he “had to spit it out.”
“How does The Hershey Co. continue to position Reese’s as its flagship brand, a symbol of trust, quality and leadership, while quietly replacing the very ingredients (Milk Chocolate + Peanut Butter) that built Reese’s trust in the first place?” Reese wrote.
He is the grandson of H.B. Reese, who invented Reese’s Peanut Butter Cups in 1928; the company was sold to Hershey’s in 1963.
Hershey’s denied the charge, saying that peanut butter cups had not changed recipe, but nonetheless pledged to return to chocolate in all its products.
But Brad Reese is not happy. In a more recent post, he takes aim at Reese’s minis, writing:
Consumers aren’t stupid. They notice when a classic melt turns waxy. They notice when a rich flavor profile gets replaced by artificial fillers. When you swap premium, natural ingredients for cheap industrial oils to squeeze out an extra point of margin, you aren’t “optimizing,” you are actively eroding the REESE’S brand equity.
The claim that chocolate is being altered with modified ingredients, such as palm oil, has been leveled at many producers. This, along with “shrinkflation” (where the product gets smaller while the price does not), has left consumers feeling like candy just isn’t what they remember.
(And the shrinkflation allegations do have some basis in reality: from the UK, The Telegraph reported that popular products had shrunk, like Cadbury’s Dairy Milk bars, weighing 50g in the 1980s versus 45g today.)
But we all also have rose-tinted memories of childhood favorites (many of which probably are pretty unappealing to the adult palate), so of course they will be bigger, tastier, better in our recollections of eating them, as a sticky-fingered eight-year-old, than they look to us now on the shelf at Walgreens.
Nonetheless, nostalgia for candy of days gone by has turned into a marketing ploy. While some of us are thinking, “This doesn’t taste as good as I remember,” other firms are bringing us back things we haven’t seen in years. This is not just happening in the US, either. In the UK, Cadbury has relaunched Astros, a brand discontinued 20 years ago, to some fans’ delight. In Australia, other discontinued products have made a return, too, with Allen’s confectionery relaunching some old brands, at least temporarily.
The news report suggests that this was “Driven by relentless social media petitions and nostalgic Aussies begging for a taste of their childhood.” Parent company Nestlé even put out a press release: “Aussies asked. Allen’s listened. Green Frogs hop back into the lolly aisle, joined by four fan favourites.”
Despite all this, it has been reported that this year’s Halloween candy sales are slower than usual, either as a result of general consumer cutbacks in discretionary spending, or partly due to higher prices as cacao is costing more.
According to the Associated Press: “This week, discount grocer Aldi was advertising a 135-piece variety pack of Mars Inc. chocolate bars—including Milky Way, Trix and Snickers—for $19.87. That’s almost the same price consumers paid for a 250-piece variety pack five years ago.”
Meanwhile, USA Today is advising readers to choose their candy based on tax laws: those containing flour, like Kit-Kats, can be taxed differently from sugar-only treats. As they explain:
Two dozen states are part of the Streamlined Sales and Use Tax Agreement (SST), which says candy is “a preparation of sugar, honey, or other natural or artificial sweeteners in combination with chocolate, fruits, nuts, or other ingredients or flavorings in the form of bars, drops, or pieces.” No flour.
This can result in a significant tax difference between a Twix and a lollipop. Whether many consumers are likely to do the kind of calculations that change their Halloween preferences based on sales tax, it does highlight the ridiculousness of much regulation.
For my part, I’ve still got candy from last year (Life Savers don’t go bad, do they?). Happy Halloween.
