Starbucks Faces Lawsuit Over Misleading Sugar-Free Claims
Overview of the Lawsuit
A recent federal lawsuit has charged Starbucks with deceptive marketing practices, claiming that some of its beverages marketed as “sugar-free” contain significant amounts of sugar. The lawsuit was filed on Friday and centers around specific products, including hot and iced protein lattes and protein matcha drinks in vanilla and caramel flavors.
Details of the Claims
According to the suit, these beverages contain anywhere from 13 to 21 grams of sugar per serving, which the lawsuit argues is misleading to consumers. It asserts, “No reasonable person” would anticipate a drink labeled “sugar-free” to include such high levels of sugar. This legal action emphasizes misleading product labeling rather than deficiencies in nutritional information.
Starbucks’ Response
In a statement provided to NBC News, Starbucks categorically denied any intent to mislead consumers. The company claims to have consistently communicated the nutritional content of its drinks, asserting that the sugar in its protein beverages derives naturally from the milk used, with no added sugar in its recipes. Furthermore, Starbucks utilizes sugar-free syrup for flavoring to maintain its product claims.
Background of the Plaintiffs
The suit was initiated by the law firm Hagens Berman, representing three consumers from California, New York, and Washington who purchased the protein drinks. This group highlights the importance of accurate labeling, given the various health-related reasons consumers may have for avoiding sugar, including diabetes and general health concerns. Steve Berman, a co-founder of the firm, emphasized the significance of what he termed a “staunch mislabeling” in the context of consumer health.
Current Marketing Practices
As of Monday, Starbucks’ website continued to advertise the drinks as “sugar-free,” yet it disclosed the sugar content per beverage and clarified that they were made without any added sugar. The lawsuit seeks damages for affected consumers and requests the court to mandate a cessation of the use of “sugar-free” labeling on products that contain sugar.
