A new putative class action filed in the Western District of Washington this month alleges that Amazon misled consumers about the sustainability of its “Amazon Basics” paper products. 

The plaintiffs claim that Amazon’s use of its “Sustainability Leaf,” “Climate Pledge Friendly” badge, and an unqualified Forest Stewardship Council (FSC) logo on certain product webpages (which Amazon says designate products that meet the company's standards and support their commitment to “help preserve the natural world) communicate misleading environmental claims in part because:

• Amazon fails to disclose that the products are sourced from ”harvests that rely on harmful logging practices" and
• Amazon's suppliers are “systematically converting import old-growth forests…into environmentally devastating tree farms…”

Additionally, according to the complaint, Amazon applies the same environmental messaging to products with significantly different sustainability profiles—for example, the complaint states that both “Amazon Aware” toilet paper (made from bamboo and sourced from FSC-certified forests) and “Amazon Basics” toilet paper (made from virgin pulp, some of which is not FSC-certified) carry the same set of sustainability badges. The plaintiffs argue that this gives consumers the false impression that all Amazon-branded paper products are equally environmentally preferable and that there is no way for consumers to deduce which product is a more sustainable choice.

Based on these allegations, the plaintiffs assert violations of 28 state laws (plus the District of Columbia). Notably, the complaint cites not only to the FTC's Green Guides (which lawsuits of this sort often do – even though the Green Guides don't carry the weight of law themselves, many state laws incorporate them by reference), but also to Amazon's own environmental advertising guidelines, which emphasize the need for substantiation and consumer clarity when making environmental claims. The allegations claim that Amazon's practices are in violation of both. 

This case is the latest example of a class actions focused on allegedly deceptive environmental marketing tactics—especially the use of badges, icons, and logos that imply broad sustainability benefits. This complaint underscores how general environmental representations are being scrutinized not only for accuracy, but also for what they imply in context.

Ramos et al v. Amazon​.com, Inc.