By Sarah Nassauer
PepsiCo sought to push up prices of soda and other goods at retailers to help Walmart, U.S. antitrust regulators alleged in a recently unsealed lawsuit that the Trump administration dismissed.
To make sure Walmart's prices were less than rivals, Pepsi tracked how much other retailers were charging, offered promotions to Walmart and in some cases tried to raise prices at other retailers, the lawsuit against the food and beverage company alleged.
The lawsuit described Pepsi's efforts as a long-term practice.
The Federal Trade Commission made the allegations in an antitrust lawsuit against Pepsi that the agency had filed in a federal court in New York City during the final days of the Biden administration.
The lawsuit was dropped months later by the FTC under the Trump administration.
The lawsuit's particulars had been confidential until last week, when the Institute for Local Self-Reliance, an anti-monopoly advocacy group, won its motion to unseal much of the redacted portions of the complaint.
"The complaint includes inaccuracies and unsubstantiated allegations, including mischaracterizations of our business dealings with customers," said a PepsiCo spokeswoman.
Pepsi operates in compliance with all laws, the spokeswoman added, and is committed to providing all customers with competitive prices.
Walmart is committed to negotiating on behalf of its customers "so we can deliver value and everyday low prices," said a Walmart spokeswoman.
The allegations shed light on the common industry practice of large consumer goods and food companies carefully managing their business with their largest retail customers because of the volume in sales at stake.
Critics say the practice can force consumers to pay higher prices depending on where they shop and give large retailers unfair pricing power.
Walmart is among the biggest food and beverage buyers, often accounting for a significant percentage of annual sales at consumer goods firms.
For Pepsi, sales through Walmart and affiliates such as Sam's Club accounted for around 14% of total revenue last year, according to company financial documents.
Early this year, the FTC filed its lawsuit against Pepsi based on a decades-old law called the Robinson-Patman Act that forbids suppliers from selling goods at different prices to retailers.
The statute, which dates from the 1930s, seeks to preserve a level playing field between small retailers and bigger sellers such as grocery chains.
The lawsuit refers to internal Pepsi emails and other communications that the FTC said it had obtained and reviewed.
"Pepsi works with Walmart to create a retail 'price gap' or 'price hedge' between Walmart and its competitors, or in other words, to give Walmart lower average retail prices than its competitors," the lawsuit said.
In 2021, Pepsi executives discussed how to keep Walmart's price gaps on soda intact, according to the lawsuit.
One option the executives considered, the lawsuit said, was working to raise prices at other retailers through the quarter. Yet executives decided it wasn't feasible to raise prices at other retailers within that time frame, according to internal communication cited in the lawsuit.
In 2022, Pepsi also worked to raise prices for its products at Food Lion, a regional grocer, because they were too close to Walmart's prices, the lawsuit said.
The FTC under former Chair Lina Khan sought to revive enforcement of the Robinson-Patman Act, which withered during the 1980s as critics argued it effectively disallowed discounting and resulted in higher prices.
At the time, the five-member FTC voted to approve the lawsuit against Pepsi in a 3-2 vote, with its two Republicans voting against the case.
After the FTC voted to dismiss the case in May, FTC Chairman Andrew Ferguson called the lawsuit a "nakedly political effort" and "legally dubious."
Write to Sarah Nassauer at Sarah.Nassauer@wsj.com
(END) Dow Jones Newswires
December 16, 2025 12:04 ET (17:04 GMT)
Copyright (c) 2025 Dow Jones & Company, Inc.
Comments