A Cake or a Biscuit⏤The Lengthy and Expensive Saga of the Jaffa Cake.

蛋糕與餅乾之爭：Jaffa Cake 冗長且昂貴的官司。

For anyone watching this who, like me, happens to be from the UK, you're more than likely already well aware of what a Jaffa Cake is.

如果有觀眾恰好跟我一樣來自英國，你大概已經很清楚 Jaffa Cake 是什麼了。

For our viewers that haven't had the pleasure of sampling one of the greatest comfort foods ever created,

但跟還沒有幸享用這史上最偉大史上最偉大舒心點心的觀眾說明一下，

they're little spongy, chocolate-coated disks that contain a small amount of orange-flavored jam.

它們是小型、海綿蛋糕口感、巧克力覆蓋的圓片，裡面有少量的柳橙口味果醬。

They really are delicious.

它們真的很美味。

Oh, and there's another point here: They were also once at the center of one of the fiercest court battles of the 1990s,

喔，這裡還有另外一個重點：它們也曾經是 1990 年代最激烈官司之一的中心，

with the lengthy and expensive case determining one and only one thing: whether or not the Jaffa Cake is a cake or a biscuit.

那場冗長且昂貴的官司目的就是為了判定一件事：Jaffa Cake 到底是蛋糕還是餅乾。

Yes, really.

對，是真的。

But before we get to all of that, for the sake of the unfamiliar, we have to first discuss the thrilling and exciting world of European Tax Law and Value-Added Tax.

但在討論那些之前，我們要先為了那些不熟悉的人討論驚悚、刺激的歐洲稅法以及增值稅的世界。

In a nutshell, Value-Added Tax (commonly shortened to V-A-T or VAT) is described as being:

簡而言之，增值稅（通常簡稱為 VAT）被描述為是：

"A type of consumption tax that is placed on a product whenever value is added at a stage of production and at final sale."

「每當產品在生產階段增值以及最終銷售所附加之上的一種消費稅。」

In essence, VAT is a tax that is paid by everyone involved with the manufacture of a given object or foodstuff and the consumer.

基本上，增值稅是由所有任一物品或食品生產參與者以及消費者所支付的稅金。

For example, if a company in the UK wanted to make socks, they'd be charged VAT on the price of the raw materials used to make them.

舉例來說，如果某間英國的公司想要生產襪子，他們也會被收取製作原物料價格的增值稅。

When that company sold the socks onto a retailer, the retailer would, similarly, be charged VAT on that sale.

當那間公司將襪子進一步賣給零銷商，零銷商在那場交易上也一樣地會被收取增值稅。

Finally, when the retailer sells the socks to the consumer, the consumer will pay VAT on top of the price charged by the retailer.

最後，當零銷商販賣襪子給消費者時，消費者除了支付零銷商的售價之外，也將支付 VAT。

At the time of the publishing of this video, the VAT rate in the UK is 20% for, to quote the official website of the British Government, "most goods and services".

在發布這部影片時，英國的增值稅率為 20%，據英國政府官網所說，「是針對多數商品與服務」。

Now, because the government isn't a cartoonishly evil entity rubbing their hands together at the thought of charging people through the nose for everyday essentials (right?),

好了，因為政府不是卡通感濃厚的邪惡單位，想到可以在日常必需品上向人民過度克稅就高興得直搓手（對吧？），

a number of things are subjected to a reduced rate of VAT⏤currently 5%⏤while some other items are exempt from this tax altogether.

有些物品須支付費率降低的增值稅（目前是 5%），而一些其它物品則完全免除此一稅金。

Goods and services subjected to the reduced rate of VAT include things like mobility aids (like walking canes and those awesome scooters)

適用於費率降低增額稅的物品及服務包括助行器（像是柺杖或是那種厲害的摩托車）

and sanitary products (think tampons, pantyliners, and other things that make certain men wary of looking in a woman's purse).

以及衛生用品（想想衛生棉條、護墊，以及其它會使一些男人不想看進女人包包的物品）。

As for things that are exempt from the tax entirely, this is mostly limited to goods and services that are considered essential or otherwise unfair to try and tax citizens for using.

至於完全免除此一稅金的物品，大多侷限在被視為必需品或是向人民課使用稅會顯得不公平的商品與服務。

Things like stamps, burials, and end-of-life care, as well as, actually, most food.

像是郵票、葬禮和臨終照護，其實還有大多數食品。

In regards to that last item, while most food, and by extension, animal feed, is exempt from VAT, certain so-called "luxury items" are taxed at the normal rate.

有關於最後一個項目，雖然多數食物（也延伸到動物飼料）免增值稅，某些所謂「奢侈品」會以正常費率課稅。

Such items include alcohol, mineral water, confectioneries, and, rather unusually, biscuits that are covered with chocolate⏤regular biscuits are, notably, exempt.

這些奢侈品包括酒精、礦泉水、糖果以及（相當不尋常的）以巧克力覆蓋的餅乾，值得注意的是，一般餅乾是免稅的。

This led to an embittered court battle between the British Government and McVities in 1991,

這導致了 1991 年英國政府和 McVities 餅乾製造公司間的一場激烈法庭鬥爭，

when British Customs and Excise decided that Jaffa Cakes should be reclassified as chocolate-covered biscuits and, hence, be liable to the standard rate of VAT.

當英國海關與消費稅局決定 Jaffa Cakes 應該被重新歸類為巧克力覆蓋的餅乾，因此必須支付一般標準的增值稅。

Jaffa Cakes had previously been considered to be cakes by Customs and Excise, something that is exempt from a tax.

Jaffa Cakes 過往曾被海關與消費稅局視為蛋糕，一種免稅的食品。

As such, one of the largest manufacturers of Jaffa Cakes, McVities, challenged this decision and took it all the way to the highest court in the land.

因此，Jaffa Cakes 最大製造商之一 McVities 挑戰了這個決策，並一路將議題送上該國最高法院。

According to the official website for Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs, the decision of the courts hinged on being able to clarify exactly what made a cake a cake and what made a biscuit a biscuit,

根據女王陛下稅務及海關總署官方網站指出，法院判決取決於能否準確地指名什麼是蛋糕、什麼是餅乾，

and arguing whether or not Jaffa Cakes conformed more to one definition or to the other.

並爭論 Jaffa Cakes 是否更符合其中一種定義。

Towards this end, the main arguments on behalf of Customs and Excise were that Jaffa Cakes are usually sold along side biscuits, are roughly biscuit-shaped, and often consumed in place of them,

為了達成此一目標，海關與消費稅局代表的主要論點是，Jaffa Cakes 通常會與餅乾擺在一起出售、大致呈餅乾狀，且常取代餅乾被食用，

adding that McVities themselves markets the product more like a biscuit than a cake.

並補充說道，McVities 自身比起蛋糕，更偏向以販賣餅乾手法行銷。

McVities countered this by stating that Jaffa Cakes were produced in a manner almost identical to that of a traditional sponge cake,

McVities 的反論則指出，Jaffa Cakes 的生產方式幾乎與傳統海綿蛋糕相同，

and they contained the same base ingredients⏤flour, eggs, and sugar.

而且它們包含相同的基本材料：麵粉、雞蛋和糖。

McVities' trump card, however, was pointing out that cakes and biscuits go stale in almost opposite ways, with cakes turning hard as they go stale and biscuits turning soft.

然而，McVities 的王牌則是指出：蛋糕和餅乾的變質方式幾乎相反，蛋糕變硬、餅乾則會變軟。

To illustrate this point, McVities left a bunch of Jaffa Cakes out in the open and later presented them to the court, proving that, like cakes, they hardened as they went stale.

為了說明這一點，McVities 將一堆 Jaffa Cakes 暴露放置，稍後將它們呈交給法官，證明它們像蛋糕一樣會在變質的過程中變硬。

According to the BBC, to really seal the deal, McVities baked a gigantic, 12-inch version of the Jaffa Cake and brought it to court to show off how similar it is to a cake when blown up to normal cake size.

據英國廣播公司（BBC）報導，真正決定結果的是，McVities 烘烤了一個巨大、12 英寸版本的 Jaffa Cake 並把它帶到法庭上，以展示它放大到正常蛋糕尺寸時，與蛋糕有多麼相似。

For anyone wondering why the courts didn't take into account the fact that they're called Jaffa "Cakes",

如果有人在想，法官為什麼不直接參考它們的名稱為 Jaffa「Cakes（蛋糕）」的這個現實，回應如下：

well, the judge presiding over the case, Mr. D.C. Potter, was asked to consider this and ruled it to be of "no serious relevance" because a product's name often has little to do with its actual function.

這個案件的主審法官 D.C. Potter 先生的確有被要求考量這一點，但他認為這點「沒有實質關聯」，因為商品名常與其實際功能沒有太大相關性。

In the end, the court decided the Jaffa Cakes were, indeed, cakes, and McVities was allowed to continue selling the product without it being subject to VAT.

最後，法官判決 Jaffa Cakes 確實是蛋糕，而 McVities 也被准許繼續在不被課增值稅的狀況下繼續販售此商品。

And now, for some bonus facts.

現在多給各位一些小知識。

Pringles were originally called "Pringles Newfangled Potato Chips".

Pringles（品客）本來的名稱是「Pringle's Newfangled Potato Chips（品客的翹鬍子洋芋片）」。

However, Pringles only contains about 42% potato-based content, with most of the rest being from wheat, starch, and various types of flour, including from corn and rice.

然而，品客只含有約 42% 馬鈴薯基底材料，其餘大多為麥粉、澱粉還其它數種麵粉，包括玉米和稻米。

Thus, the US Food and Drug Administration made them change the name because their product didn't technically meet the definition of a "potato chip".

因此，美國食品藥物管理局要求他們改名，因為他們的產品嚴格來說不符合「洋芋片」的定義。

So, they were only allowed to use the word "chip" in very restrictive ways.

所以說，他們必須在受高度限制的狀況下才能夠使用「洋芋片」這個詞。

Specifically, if they wanted to continue to use "chip", they were only allowed to say, "Pringles potato chips made from dried potatoes".

具體地說，如果他們想要繼續使用「洋芋片」這個名稱，他們只能註明：「由乾燥馬鈴薯製成的品客洋芋片」。

Not being too fond of this requirement, the company changed the name slightly, using potato "crisps" rather than potato "chips".

因為不太滿意這項要求，該公司稍微修改的品名，改用「脆片」取代「洋芋片」。

Today, of course, most people know them as just "Pringles".

當然，今天大多數人都以「品客」來稱呼它們。

Now, this actually brings us to a rather interesting UK connection.

好了，這其實將我們引導到一個與英國的有趣連結。

In order to avoid the Value-Added Tax, Proctor & Gamble argues in the UK that Pringles should be considered a cake rather than a "crisp",

為了規避增值稅，寶僑公司在英國辯稱品客應該被視為蛋糕，而不是「脆片」，

since only 42% of the product was made from potato and it is fashioned from dough.

因為該產品只有 42% 是馬鈴薯，而且是由麵團形式製成。

The company won in the high court, and Pringles were briefly considered a cake in the UK.

該公司在高等法院勝訴，品客在英國曾短暫地被視為蛋糕。

However, Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs appealed the decision and, in 2009, the ruling was reversed and the company had to start paying VAT.

然而，女王陛下稅務及海關總署對於判決提出上訴，法院並在 2009 年時修改判決，使得該公司必須開始支付增值稅。

So, really hope you enjoyed that video; if you did, please do hit that thumbs-up button below.

那麼，真心希望各位影片看得開心，如果是的話，請務必在下方點讚。

Do not forget to subscribe; we got brand-new videos just like this every day of the week.

別忘記要訂閱，我們每一天都會發布像這樣的新影片。

Also, over there on the right, some videos from the archives, and as always, thank you for watching.

另外，右邊是我們庫存中的一些影片，一如既往地，感謝各位觀看。