E 962: What Aspartame-Acesulfame Salt Means

An ingredient list that says E 962 or salt of aspartame-acesulfame can look like it names a completely new sweetener. It does not. E 962 is made from two familiar high-intensity sweeteners—aspartame and acesulfame K—in a single crystalline ingredient.

The name gained fresh attention in September 2026, when the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) completed a new review. The agency concluded that E 962, aspartame, and acesulfame K do not raise a safety concern at currently reported uses and exposure levels. It also identified specification questions that regulators should update.

Here is how E 962 differs from its components, what the new conclusion does and does not mean, and how to interpret it on a label.

What Is E 962?

E 962 is the European additive number for salt of aspartame-acesulfame. Manufacturers produce it by combining aspartame (E 951) and acesulfame K (E 950) in an acidic water solution, then crystallizing, separating, washing, and drying the resulting salt. EFSA describes the starting ratio as approximately two parts aspartame to one part acesulfame K by weight.

The ingredient provides intense sweetness with little needed in a finished food. EU rules authorize it in selected categories of energy-reduced foods, foods with no added sugar, chewing gum, tabletop sweeteners, and certain other products. Authorization describes where an additive may legally be used; it does not mean every product in those categories contains it.

E 962 is not a mixture hidden behind a new name. It is a defined salt with its own specification and additive number. However, the body does not keep it intact after consumption.

What Happens to E 962 After You Eat It?

EFSA concluded that E 962 fully separates into aspartame and acesulfame ions after ingestion. Those components are expected to follow the same biological paths as aspartame and acesulfame K consumed separately.

That is why EFSA assessed E 962 largely through the evidence for its two components rather than inventing a separate acceptable daily intake for the salt. The relevant existing acceptable daily intakes are:

Aspartame (E 951): 40 milligrams per kilogram of body weight per day
Acesulfame K (E 950): 15 milligrams per kilogram of body weight per day

An acceptable daily intake, or ADI, estimates an amount that can be consumed every day over a lifetime without appreciable health risk. It includes uncertainty factors and is a tool for population risk assessment. It is not a recommended intake, and passing it once is not a line where an ingredient suddenly becomes toxic.

What Did EFSA Find in 2026?

EFSA reviewed toxicology and epidemiology evidence, submitted use and occurrence data, and dietary information from 46 food-consumption surveys across 23 EU countries. For aspartame, the updated literature search covered relevant studies through June 2025.

The panel concluded that:

E 962 does not present a safety concern at currently reported uses and use levels.
Estimated exposure to its aspartame and acesulfame components remained below their respective ADIs across the evaluated age groups.
The available evidence did not support a causal link between current dietary exposure to aspartame and the adverse outcomes EFSA evaluated.
Identified uncertainties did not change the overall conclusion for E 950, E 951, or E 962.

In EFSA's refined assessment, the highest estimated 95th-percentile aspartame exposure was 26.7 milligrams per kilogram of body weight per day among toddlers—below the 40-milligram ADI. That estimate combined aspartame coming directly from E 951 with aspartame released from E 962.

These findings are reassuring within the evaluated conditions. They are not proof that unlimited intake is harmless, nor are they a statement that every sugar-free food is nutritionally preferable to its alternative.

Why Did EFSA Still Recommend Changes?

A “no safety concern” conclusion can sit alongside recommendations to improve technical standards. EFSA found that the existing E 962 purity criteria do not fully align with current specifications or proposed specification updates for its two starting ingredients.

The panel recommended that EU specifications make clear that E 962 must be produced from compliant E 950 and E 951. It also recommended reviewing limits for arsenic and lead in the specifications for aspartame, following the approach used for other re-evaluated sweeteners.

EFSA also discussed uncertainty around a potential impurity in acesulfame K called 5-chloro-acesulfame. The panel said that uncertainty applies to E 962 because acesulfame K is used to manufacture it, but concluded that it did not alter the overall safety finding.

This is an important distinction: a regulator can conclude that reported exposure is not a safety concern while still seeking tighter or better-aligned manufacturing specifications.

What About Aspartame and Cancer Headlines?

In 2023, the International Agency for Research on Cancer classified aspartame as “possibly carcinogenic to humans,” based on limited evidence. At the same time, the Joint FAO/WHO Expert Committee on Food Additives (JECFA) reaffirmed the aspartame ADI of 0–40 milligrams per kilogram of body weight per day.

Those statements answer different questions. IARC performs hazard identification—whether an agent could cause cancer under some circumstances—while JECFA and EFSA perform risk assessments that consider dose and real-world exposure. A hazard classification does not tell you the likelihood of harm at a particular dietary intake.

EFSA's 2026 review considered newer evidence and retained the same 40-milligram ADI. You do not have to treat either the hazard classification or the exposure assessment as a slogan; together, they show why dose and the type of scientific evaluation matter.

E 962 and Phenylketonuria

Because E 962 contains aspartame, it is a source of phenylalanine. EU food-additive rules require relevant foods containing aspartame or aspartame-acesulfame salt to state “contains a source of phenylalanine.”

That warning is specifically important for people with phenylketonuria (PKU), who must manage phenylalanine intake under professional guidance. E 962 should not be treated as an aspartame-free option. If PKU affects you or someone in your household, follow the individual plan provided by the appropriate clinical team rather than estimating from a general article.

How E 962 May Appear on a Label

Depending on the market, the ingredient may be written as:

E 962
Salt of aspartame-acesulfame
Aspartame-acesulfame salt
Aspartame-acesulfame

Do not confuse E 962 with a product that simply lists aspartame and acesulfame K as two separate ingredients. The sweet taste may be similar, and the same components are relevant after digestion, but the ingredient identity and regulatory listing are different.

Also check the complete product rather than stopping at one sweetener. A “sugar-free” or “energy-reduced” food may contain other sweeteners, sugar alcohols, acids, flavors, gums, caffeine, or substantial amounts of sodium or saturated fat.

A Practical Sweetener-Label Checklist

When you encounter E 962, use a simple process:

Confirm the exact name. E 962 is the salt; E 951 is aspartame; E 950 is acesulfame K.
Look for the phenylalanine statement. This is essential information for people managing PKU.
Compare like with like. Review the nutrition panel, serving size, and full ingredient list on the alternative product.
Consider frequency, not fear. One ingredient rarely describes your whole dietary pattern or total sweetener exposure.
Treat ADIs as regulatory tools. Product labels usually do not disclose sweetener milligrams, so they are not precise personal dose calculators.

Our guide to E-numbers in food explains how additive codes work. You can also compare the profiles for aspartame (E 951) and acesulfame K (E 950), or read about the different sweetener Reb M.

Toxic Scan can help identify these names when they appear in a long ingredient list. The useful decision still comes from context: why the ingredient is present, what else the product contains, and how often you consume it.

The Bottom Line

E 962 is a crystalline ingredient made from aspartame and acesulfame K. It separates into those two components after ingestion, so EFSA's 2026 review evaluated it through the evidence and exposure limits for both.

EFSA found no safety concern at currently reported uses and exposure levels, while recommending updated purity specifications. Read E 962 as a source of both sweetener components—not as a mysterious third compound—and remember that it is also a source of phenylalanine.

References

European Food Safety Authority. (2026). “EFSA Concludes the Salt of Aspartame-Acesulfame (E 962) Is Safe at Current Exposure Levels.” EFSA. https://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/news/efsa-concludes-salt-aspartame-acesulfame-e-962-safe-current-exposure-levels 2. European Food Safety Authority Panel on Food Additives and Flavourings. (2026). “Re-evaluation of Salt of Aspartame-Acesulfame (E 962) as Food Additive.” EFSA Journal, 24(9), e10259. https://doi.org/10.2903/j.efsa.2026.10259 3. European Parliament and Council of the European Union. (2008, consolidated 2024). “Regulation (EC) No 1333/2008 on Food Additives.” EUR-Lex. https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/TXT/PDF/?uri=CELEX:02008R1333-20241216 4. World Health Organization. (2023). “Aspartame Hazard and Risk Assessment Results Released.” WHO. https://www.who.int/news/item/14-07-2023-aspartame-hazard-and-risk-assessment-results-released 5. World Health Organization, Joint FAO/WHO Expert Committee on Food Additives. (2023). “Aspartame.” JECFA Database. https://apps.who.int/food-additives-contaminants-jecfa-database/Home/Chemical/62