Lawsuits Challenged Sugar-Free Labeling Claims
Consumers filed lawsuits over allulose being used in products marketed as sugar-free or no sugar added.
Updated on Sept. 29, 2026 in Organic Food
Live Poll
Should food companies be held liable for marketing allulose-containing snacks as sugar-free?
New class-action lawsuits allege that Trader Joe's and Welch's misled consumers by labeling products as sugar-free despite containing the ingredient allulose. The suits argue that allulose meets the regulatory definition of a sugar, challenging the marketing of items like dark chocolate chips and fruit snacks.
Why it matters
These legal actions highlight a regulatory friction point regarding how sugar substitutes are categorized on food labels. The outcome of these cases could influence how manufacturers disclose ingredients and affect the reliability of no-sugar-added labels for shoppers.
Plaintiffs filed one class-action lawsuit against Trader Joe's in Illinois and four separate lawsuits against Welch's across California, Illinois, and New York. The filings represent a proposed class of consumers in eight states, though the legal definition of allulose as sugar remains contested.
The players
Trader Joe's
A national grocery chain known for its private-label foods and snacks.
Welch's
A food processing company that produces fruit-based snacks and beverages.
The details
The lawsuits center on the use of allulose, a rare sugar that manufacturers often include in products marketed as having no sugar added. Plaintiffs contend that because allulose is a simple sugar, labeling products as sugar-free is deceptive to consumers who rely on these claims to manage their sugar intake. The complaints specifically cite Trader Joe's dark chocolate chips, where allulose is listed as the second ingredient, and Welch's Zero Sugar Fruity Bites.
Timeline
September 16, 2026: A class-action complaint was filed against Trader Joe's in Illinois.
September 2026: Four separate class-action lawsuits were filed against Welch's in California, Illinois, and New York.
Health Landscape
These cases directly challenge the industry's interpretation of how the FDA's regulatory definition of sugar applies to the ingredient allulose. They follow an ongoing trend where consumer litigation is forcing courts to clarify labeling standards for sugar substitutes in processed foods.
If you are strictly managing your sugar intake, look beyond the front-of-package claims and check the full ingredient list for allulose. It is worth discussing with your doctor or a registered dietitian if specific sugar substitutes affect your health markers.
The takeaway
These lawsuits serve as a reminder that marketing language like sugar-free does not always match the technical composition of an ingredient list. When choosing foods to support your health goals, always verify the specific ingredients on the back of the package.
Further reading
For more on how food labeling works and what common claims mean for your pantry, visit Organic Food.
Source note: This article includes information reported by New York Post.
Live Poll
Should food companies be held liable for marketing allulose-containing snacks as sugar-free?
