Sprite and Fanta Under Scrutiny: Lawsuit Challenges the “100% Natural Flavors” Claim

In May 2025, California resident Victoria Palmer filed a class-action lawsuit against The Coca‑Cola Company, alleging that its products Sprite and Fanta are misleadingly labeled with the phrase “100% Natural Flavors” despite containing synthetic ingredients. At the heart of the complaint are additives such as industrial citric acid, sodium and potassium citrate, aspartame, acesulfame K, and sodium and potassium benzoate—compounds that significantly contribute to the flavor but do not meet the FDA’s definition of “natural flavors.”

The lawsuit, filed on May 27 in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California (Case No. 2:25‑cv‑04777), accuses Coca‑Cola of violating seven laws, including California’s Consumer Legal Remedies Act, the Unfair Competition Law, and the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act. The company is also charged with breach of warranty and profiting from false advertising claims.

According to the 64-page court filing, portfolio products—such as Sprite Lemon‑Lime, Sprite Zero Sugar, Fanta Orange, Fanta Strawberry, and various limited editions—not only contain synthetic ingredients, but these additives function as key components of the beverage flavor. The lawsuit highlights that citric acid, though originally derived from fruit, is now largely produced industrially through genetically modified molds and, therefore, should not be considered “natural.” Added to this are synthetic preservatives and artificial sweeteners found in the “Zero Sugar” versions (aspartame and acesulfame K).

The core argument is that consumers may have paid more or specifically chosen these products under the belief that they were entirely natural. If the lawsuit succeeds, Coca‑Cola could be forced to revise its product labeling, compensate consumers, and face a significant hit to its credibility.

This legal action extends beyond Coca‑Cola, serving as a broader challenge to the legitimacy of using terms like “natural” in food and beverage labeling. How far can a company go in using the word “natural” when part of the flavor is chemically synthesized? The answer lies not just in regulatory definitions, but in maintaining consumer trust.

So far, Coca‑Cola has not issued a public response. The case remains in its early stages, but it is already sparking national interest around transparency in food marketing and consumers’ right to know what they are really drinking.