Starbucks is facing a proposed class-action lawsuit alleging that several of its drinks marketed as “sugar-free” actually contain significant amounts of sugar — in some cases nearly as much as a candy bar.
The lawsuit, filed Oct. 2 in federal court in Washington state, targets eight hot and iced Starbucks protein beverages, including the Sugar-Free Vanilla Protein Latte, Sugar-Free Caramel Protein Latte and protein matcha drinks. According to the suit, a venti-sized serving of these drinks contains between 13 and 21 grams of sugar.
The lawsuit reportedly argues that “no reasonable consumer” would expect a product labeled “sugar-free” to contain that much sugar. It was brought by three consumers who purchased the drinks in California, New York and Washington, and it asks the court to bar Starbucks from using the term “sugar-free” to describe these products.
Starbucks pushes back
Starbucks is disputing the claims. “We believe these claims have no merit,” a company spokesperson told Fox News Digital.
“Starbucks has consistently and clearly provided information about its protein beverages, sugar-free options, customization choices, and nutritional content across product announcements, menus, marketing materials, Starbucks.com and the Starbucks app, and we intend to vigorously defend ourselves in this matter.”
The company says the sugar in question comes naturally from protein-boosted milk, not from added sugar, and that the drinks use sugar-free syrups for flavoring.
What “sugar-free” actually means
Nicolette Pace, a New York-based registered dietitian and certified diabetes educator, said lactose in milk is a naturally occurring sugar that is not counted as added sugar — but she noted that “sugar-free” and “no added sugar” are not the same thing.
Dr. Michael Aziz, an internist at Lenox Hill Hospital in New York City, said “sugar-free” doesn’t necessarily mean a product has zero sugar. Under FDA regulations, products labeled “sugar-free” generally must contain less than 0.5 gram of sugar per serving. “No added sugar,” by contrast, means no sugar or sugar-containing ingredients were added during processing, even though the product may still contain naturally occurring sugar — which Starbucks says is the case with its protein drinks. Naturally occurring sugars can still raise blood glucose levels, which matters for people managing diabetes.
Danny Karon, an Ohio-based class-action attorney not involved in the case, said the plaintiffs argue they paid a premium for products marketed as sugar-free compared with similar alternatives. “The challenge will be convincing the court — and then the jury — that consumers relied on Starbucks’ alleged misrepresentations when making their purchases,” Karon said.
Other Starbucks drinks carry heavy sugar loads too
Beyond the drinks named in the lawsuit, Aziz and Pace said several other Starbucks specialty beverages contain substantial sugar, depending on size and add-ons like whipped cream and drizzle. A venti Java Chip Frappuccino, for example, can contain close to 80 grams of sugar — roughly 20 teaspoons. The Caramel Ribbon Crunch Frappuccino and seasonal drinks such as the Peppermint Mocha and Pumpkin Spice Latte can come close to that amount as well.
“That’s massive amounts of sugar when we know that a soda has 63 grams of sugar,” Aziz said, referring to standard 20-ounce bottles of popular regular sodas.
“Size does matter when it comes to these things at Starbucks,” Pace said. The American Heart Association recommends limiting added sugar intake to about 6 teaspoons, or 25 grams, per day for most women, and 9 teaspoons, or 36 grams, for men. Pace noted those guidelines apply to added sugar, not the naturally occurring lactose found in milk.
For shoppers hoping to cut back, Pace suggested ordering simply and choosing a smaller size. Aziz offered similar advice: “If you want to have a treat, maybe just have a simple latte or a cappuccino.”
