Consumer Federation of America sues Meta for allegedly knowingly earning $16 billion from fraudulent ads

(AsiaGameHub) –   The Consumer Federation of America has filed a class-action lawsuit against Meta Platforms in Washington, D.C., alleging that the company allows fraudulent advertisements to reach users while generating significant revenue from high-risk advertisers.

---

Key Facts to Note

• The CFA claims Meta failed to protect users from fraudulent adverts.
• The legal complaint alleges Meta earned billions of dollars from ads for scams and prohibited goods.
• Meta has denied the allegations and stated it will contest the case.

---

CFA Legal Action Takes Aim at Meta’s Advertising Policies

Meta Platforms is facing a class-action lawsuit launched by the Consumer Federation of America over scam ads appearing on Facebook and other platforms owned by Meta.

The CFA, a coalition of non-profit consumer advocacy groups, submitted the case to the Superior Court in Washington, D.C. It is seeking damages as well as the recovery of what it claims are illicit profits linked to fraudulent advertising.

The complaint notes that Meta portrays itself as active in combating scam ads, but has instead rolled out policies that prioritize revenue gains while leaving users vulnerable to harm.

“Meta claims it is taking every possible step to crack down on fraudulent advertising on its platforms. But in reality, Meta has knowingly taken measures and adopted policies that boost its bottom line at the cost of its users’ safety and well-being. In fact, instead of banning advertisers that the company itself has identified as posing a higher risk to its users — as other tech firms including Google have done — Meta simply charges these advertisers higher fees.”

The lawsuit states that Meta earns roughly $7 billion annually from high-risk ads alone. It also cites internal company documents that reportedly projected around 10% of Meta’s total 2024 revenue, equal to about $16 billion, would come from ads connected to scams and banned goods, including those displayed on Facebook.

Meta rejected the claims in an official statement provided to media outlets.

“These allegations misrepresent the actual nature of our work, and we will fight them.”

The CFA argues that Meta violated the D.C. Consumer Protection Procedures Act. This legislation bars unfair or deceptive trade practices, and also applies to unlawful advertising linked to consumer goods and services.