FTC Sues Kroger and Albertsons for Grocery Price Fixing

The Federal Trade Commission filed an antitrust suit against Kroger and Albertsons in June 2026, alleging the two grocery chains coordinated pricing on staple

foods including eggs, dairy, bread, and cooking oil in at least 14 US metropolitan markets where both chains operate.

For more context, see our coverage of Climate Litigation 2026 Courts Around the World.

Key Developments

The complaint, filed in the Northern District of Illinois, cites pricing data from 2022 to 2025 showing that prices at Kroger and Albertsons stores

moved in lockstep on 187 product categories within 24 hours of each other in the identified markets, a pattern the FTC says is inconsistent

with independent competitive pricing.

Background and Context

For more context, see our coverage of US-India Trade Deal Latest Updates.

The FTC is seeking injunctive relief to stop alleged coordinated pricing, disgorgement of profits earned during the alleged coordination period, and structural remedies including

potential store divestitures in markets where the two chains are each other’s primary competitors. Read also: World Cup 2026 June 19: USA vs Australia,

What Experts Are Saying

Brazil vs Haiti.

For more context, see our coverage of Trump and Qatar Air Force One Deal.

The FTC’s investigation, which began in 2024 following congressional pressure and consumer complaints, obtained internal communications through civil investigative demands showing that Kroger and

Albertsons pricing teams monitored each other’s price changes in real time using third-party data services.

The complaint identifies a specific 2023 episode where Albertsons raised egg prices by 28 cents per dozen in Phoenix and Kroger matched the increase

within 18 hours, then both held the higher price for 14 weeks despite wholesale egg costs falling in that period.

Third-party grocery chains operating in the same markets, including Walmart, Aldi, and regional grocers, did not match the price increases at the same speed

or to the same degree, which the FTC says demonstrates that the behavior was not simply a response to market conditions.

See also: World Cup 2026 June 18: Mexico, South Korea, Canada, Qatar.

Kroger said in a statement that the FTC’s case “misunderstands competitive grocery pricing” and that tracking competitor prices and responding to them is “standard,

lawful competitive behavior.” Albertsons issued a similar statement, saying it competes “vigorously and independently” in every market.

Both companies noted that the FTC previously challenged their proposed merger, which was abandoned in 2024 after courts blocked it.

Legal analysts said the FTC’s continued scrutiny of both companies following the blocked merger reflects the agency’s ongoing concern about grocery market consolidation.

Consumer advocacy groups including the Consumer Federation of America praised the lawsuit, saying groceries are a necessity where pricing coordination has an outsized impact

on lower-income households that spend a higher share of income on food.

Price fixing is an illegal agreement between competitors to set, maintain, or stabilize prices rather than competing independently. It violates Section 1 of the Sherman Antitrust Act.

The FTC’s case against Kroger and Albertsons alleges “conscious parallelism” – coordinated pricing behavior that, while not necessarily involving an explicit agreement, produces the same anticompetitive effects.

The FTC can seek injunctive relief requiring companies to stop coordinated pricing behavior. It cannot directly set grocery prices.

If the FTC wins the case, it could require behavioral remedies such as ending the use of certain price-monitoring services, or structural remedies such

as store divestitures in concentrated markets to increase competition.

Antitrust cases of this complexity typically take 2-4 years to resolve through litigation. Both companies are expected to vigorously defend the case.

Alternatively, the case could settle before trial with consent decrees that impose behavioral restrictions on the companies without admitting liability, which is the more common resolution in FTC antitrust actions.

Sources: CNBC – Economy | Reuters – Business | Bloomberg – Economics