Vuse Vape Brand: "Carbon Neutral" Claims Under Fire

Case Overview: A class action lawsuit alleges British American Tobacco and its subsidiaries falsely marketed Vuse vape products as "carbon neutral," claiming the companies' offset projects are flawed and ineffective.

Consumers Affected: California consumers who purchased any Vuse-brand vape after May 28, 2021.

Court: U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California

A new class action lawsuit says the makers of Vuse vape products are blowing smoke when it comes to their environmental claims. Consumers accuse British American Tobacco and its subsidiaries, including R.J. Reynolds Vapor Company, of misleading them by falsely labeling their Vuse devices as “carbon neutral.”

Filed in California, the lawsuit challenges years of marketing around popular devices like the Vuse Solo, Alto, Ciro, and Vibe, alleging that the companies’ claims about eliminating their carbon footprint are based on flawed and ineffective carbon offset projects.

Carbon Offset Projects Allegedly Lack Real Impact

According to the complaint, since 2021, British American Tobacco and its affiliates have aggressively promoted Vuse as the world’s first carbon-neutral vape brand. The companies said they achieved this by reducing emissions through internal efforts and offsetting the rest via reforestation-based carbon credits.

But the lawsuit argues those credits are essentially worthless. More than 84% of the carbon offsets used came from four forestry projects—one in Uruguay and three in China—that plaintiffs say would have occurred even without the companies’ financial support. That means the projects don’t actually offer additional environmental benefit, violating a core principle of legitimate carbon offsets.

An independent agency reportedly found nearly 80% of the credits retired by the companies had little to no chance of delivering actual emissions reductions. Despite this, Vuse continued to market its products as environmentally responsible, using the “carbon neutral” claim as a key branding tool in a market where sustainability sways buying decisions.

Consumers Say They Paid Premium for Unfulfilled Green Claims

Three California residents—Vanessa Bell, Destiney Murrah, and Sean Nugent—say they purchased various Vuse devices over the past few years, relying on the companies’ promises that the products were carbon neutral. They believed they were making more eco-conscious choices—and paid a price premium as a result.

Instead, the plaintiffs argue, they were misled by a carefully crafted marketing campaign that banked on green branding without delivering the benefits. They claim they would not have bought the products (or would have paid less) if they had known the truth about the carbon offsets being used.

Tobacco Companies Join Growing Ranks of "Greenwashing" Disputes

The lawsuit joins a rising tide of litigation targeting what’s known as greenwashing—when companies overstate or misrepresent the environmental benefits of their products to appeal to eco-conscious consumers. 

Amazon is facing a similar lawsuit over its Amazon Basics paper products, which are marketed as sustainable using eco-labels like the “Climate Pledge Friendly” badge and FSC certification. But plaintiffs allege those labels mask the fact that the products are sourced from suppliers linked to harmful logging practices.

Apple is also in the hot seat, with a recent lawsuit accusing the tech giant of falsely promoting certain Apple Watches as “carbon neutral.” Even Lululemon, known for its yoga gear and wellness branding, has been sued for allegedly misrepresenting its environmental commitments, and Florida Crystals, a major sugar company, is also facing a lawsuit over presenting itself as eco-friendly while allegedly harming communities through sugarcane field burning.

In this latest legal action, the plaintiffs want to represent anyone in California who, after May 28, 2021, purchased any Vuse-brand vape. 

Case Details

• Lawsuit: Bell et al. v. R.J. Reynolds Vapor Company, et al.
• Case Number: 3:25-cv-04521-TSH 
• Court: U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California 

Plaintiffs' Attorney:

• Amber L. Schubert (Schubert Jonckheer & Kolbe LLP)
• Fletch Trammell (Trammell PC)
• Don Bivens and Teresita T. Mercado (Don Bivens, PLLC)

Do you choose products based on 'carbon neutral' claims? Share your thoughts on Vuse's environmental assertions below.