Starbucks Faces Lawsuit Over Sugar Content in “Sugar-Free” Protein Drinks
When you order a pumpkin spice latte or caramel macchiato from Starbucks, you expect a certain level of sweetness. But what about drinks labeled as “sugar-free”?
A U.S. class-action lawsuit alleges that Starbucks falsely advertised eight protein beverages as “sugar-free” when they actually contain between 13 and 21 grams of sugar per venti-size serving due to the natural sugar in milk. The lawsuit, filed in a Seattle federal court, claims that Starbucks aimed to profit from the protein trend and customers’ nutritional preferences.
Starbucks defended its products, stating that they have provided clear information on protein beverages, sugar-free options, and nutritional content. The lawsuit questions whether the drinks are truly sugar-free and highlights the discrepancy between the labeling and the actual sugar content.
The lawsuit lists eight beverages, including sugar-free vanilla protein latte, sugar-free caramel protein latte, and others, all available on both U.S. and Starbucks Canada websites. Despite being listed under “no added sugar options,” each drink carries the “sugar-free” label in its title.
While Starbucks launched these beverages in September 2025 to cater to customers seeking more protein in their diets, the lawsuit emphasizes that the sugar in the drinks comes from milk, specifically lactose.
The lawsuit argues that despite the natural sugar content in milk, Starbucks misleadingly labels these beverages as “sugar-free,” prompting consumers to make purchasing decisions based on such representations. U.S. federal law prohibits using “sugar-free” for beverages with more than 0.5 grams of sugar per serving. Similarly, Canada requires products labeled as sugar-free to contain less than 0.5 grams of sugar per serving.
The complaint seeks damages for false advertising and violations of consumer protection laws. It also seeks class-action certification and a trial by jury. The lawsuit was filed on behalf of consumers who purchased Starbucks’s sugar-free protein drinks in California, New York, and Washington.
Consumers who avoid sugar due to health reasons, such as diabetes, may find the mislabeling significant, according to the firm representing the plaintiffs. The lawsuit raises concerns about the accuracy of sugar-free labeling and its impact on consumer choices.