Truvia stevia leaf sweetener is mostly erythritol, a new class action alleges.

Adina Ringler filed a class action lawsuit against Cargill Inc. in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California on Oct. 29, 2026.

The lawsuit claims Cargill sells Truvia as a stevia leaf sweetener yet the product consists mostly of erythritol, a manufactured sugar alcohol.

Stevia vs. erythritol

The complaint claims Truvia's front label advertises the product as a calorie-free sweetener derived from the stevia leaf with plant-based stevia sweetness and no artificial sweeteners. Erythritol allegedly appears on that panel only in small type.

Erythritol, not stevia, makes up most of the product, the lawsuit contends. The ingredient list puts it first, and federal rules require labels to order ingredients by weight.

Ringler claims she bought Truvia believing it came mostly from stevia and would not have bought it, or would have paid less, had she known erythritol made up most of it.

The lawsuit alleges that industrial processing of both sweeteners makes the no-artificial-sweeteners claim misleading. Truvia's erythritol allegedly comes from yeast fermenting a simple sugar called dextrose followed by filtering and drying into crystals. Only 14% of consumers in a 2022 New Hope Network survey considered erythritol a natural sweetener, the filing says.

The proposed class action makes similar claims about the stevia extract, pointing to a 2008 Food and Drug Administration letter that describes Cargill's multistep process for purifying a stevia compound with water, resin and alcohol. It contends the finished extract no longer resembles the leaf on the package.

The legal claims

The lawsuit brings nine claims:


  • California Consumers Legal Remedies Act, which bars deceptive practices in consumer sales

  • California Unfair Competition Law, which prohibits unfair business practices

  • California False Advertising Law, which bans untrue or misleading ads

  • Minnesota consumer fraud and false advertising laws, which include deceptive sales claims and ads

  • Breach of express and implied warranty, which applies when a product does not match what its label promises

  • Intentional and negligent misrepresentation, which covers false statements a company knew or should have known were untrue

  • Unjust enrichment, which applies when a company profits unfairly at someone else's expense

The class action seeks compensation for buyers' losses, punitive damages, refunds, an order stopping the challenged marketing, corrective advertising and attorneys' fees.

What the lawsuit means for Truvia buyers

The proposed class covers anyone in the United States who bought Truvia's stevia leaf sweetener in packets, spoonable jars or bags with a separate group for people who bought it in California. Truvia's monk fruit sweeteners do not qualify.

As of this writing, there is no settlement, no claims process and no money available.