Pepsi and Walmart Caught in Massive Price-Fixing Scheme, Did You Overpay for Your Soda for the Last 10 Years?
What’s the Pepsi-Walmart Lawsuit About?
Three consumers—Martin Gelbspan, Aaron Hinds, and Alexander Govea—filed a class action lawsuit on December 15, 2025, in federal court alleging Pepsi and Walmart conspired in a price-fixing scheme lasting nearly a decade. The lawsuit claims Pepsi sold products to Walmart at wholesale prices lower than competitors, forcing shoppers at other stores to pay artificially inflated retail prices for Pepsi products since January 2015.
Here’s what makes this personal: while Walmart controls only about a quarter of the grocery market, the vast majority of consumers shopping elsewhere allegedly had their prices increased. If you bought a can of Pepsi, Mountain Dew, or Gatorade at your local grocery store anytime in the last ten years, you might have paid more than Walmart shoppers—not because of market forces, but because of what the lawsuit calls an illegal agreement between two corporate giants.
How the Alleged Price-Fixing Scheme Worked
The allegations paint a disturbing picture of corporate coordination. According to the 33-page complaint filed in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, here’s exactly how the scheme allegedly operated:
The “Price Gap” Strategy
Pepsi worked diligently to create and maintain a “price gap” between Walmart and its competitors, monitoring the market on Walmart’s behalf. When other retailers dropped their Pepsi prices, Pepsi would respond—but not by giving those stores better deals. Instead, they’d give Walmart additional promotional allowances or reduce promotional payments to competitors.
Real-World Example: The Food Lion Punishment
Food Lion, a regional chain with over 1,000 stores, was targeted for being the “worst offender” of Pepsi’s pro-Walmart bias, with Pepsi enacting a multi-year strategy to raise Food Lion’s wholesale costs. This wasn’t about discounts for Walmart—it was about forcing higher prices at Walmart’s competitors.
What Pepsi Allegedly Did
- Provided Walmart with special promotional payments and advertising tools not available to competitors
- Shared pricing data about competitors with Walmart
- Monitored competitor pricing to maintain Walmart’s advantage
- Reduced or eliminated promotional support for stores that priced too low
- Increased wholesale prices for retailers who competed too aggressively
Which Products Are Covered?
If you purchased any of these Pepsi-owned brands at stores other than Walmart since January 2015, you’re potentially part of the class:
- Sodas: Pepsi, Diet Pepsi, Mountain Dew, Starry
- Sparkling Water: Bubly
- Water: Aquafina
- Teas: Lipton, PureLeaf
- Sports Drinks: Gatorade
- Energy Drinks: Rockstar
- Coffee: Bottled Starbucks beverages
The lawsuit doesn’t limit this to specific package sizes or formats—if it’s a Pepsi product sold at retail, it’s potentially covered.
The Legal Foundation: Why This Matters
The Robinson-Patman Act Connection
This private lawsuit builds on an FTC case filed in January 2025 alleging Pepsi violated the Robinson-Patman Act by giving Walmart preferential treatment. The Robinson-Patman Act, passed in 1936, prohibits companies from price discrimination that harms competition.
The FTC alleged that PepsiCo’s preferential pricing and promotions for Walmart “disadvantaged retailers who compete with Walmart in the retail sale of Pepsi soft drinks across the United States, including family-owned neighborhood grocery stores, local convenience stores, mid-tier grocers, and independent retailers”.
Though the FTC dismissed its case in May 2025, the complaint was later unsealed, revealing the evidence that now fuels this consumer class action.
Antitrust Law Violations
The class action alleges violations of antitrust law, claiming the arrangement eliminated price competition and harmed consumers with higher prices. The Sherman Antitrust Act prohibits agreements that restrain trade, and price-fixing is considered one of the most serious violations.
What Damages Are Being Sought?
The lawsuit seeks a jury trial and monetary damages. Here’s what makes this potentially massive:
Treble Damages
If defendants violated antitrust laws, they may have to pay treble damages—three times the amount of damages awarded. This isn’t a penalty; it’s what federal antitrust law requires to deter corporate price-fixing.
Who’s Eligible
The plaintiffs are seeking class action status on behalf of millions of Pepsi consumers, covering all U.S. consumers who purchased Pepsi soft drinks from non-Walmart retailers since January 2015.
That’s potentially tens of millions of Americans who bought Pepsi products at grocery stores, convenience stores, gas stations, and other retailers over a ten-year period.
How Companies Are Responding
Pepsi’s Defense
PepsiCo disputes the allegations and intends “to defend ourselves vigorously in court,” stating the lawsuit “leverages the inaccuracies and unsubstantiated allegations in the dismissed FTC Complaint, including mischaracterizations of our business dealings with customers”.
A Pepsi spokesperson emphasized the company “operates in compliance with applicable laws and remains committed to providing all customers with fair, competitive, and non-discriminatory pricing.”
Walmart’s Position
Walmart stated it remains “committed to negotiating on behalf of our customers so we can deliver value and everyday low prices”.
Neither company has addressed the specific allegations about monitoring competitor prices or coordinating to maintain price gaps.
Current Lawsuit Status
Where Things Stand Now
The lawsuit is in its earliest stages. The plaintiffs asked on December 26, 2025, that Walmart and Pepsi be summoned to reply to their complaint within 21 business days.
What Happens Next
- Defendants’ Response: Pepsi and Walmart will likely file motions to dismiss, arguing the claims lack legal merit
- Class Certification: If the case survives dismissal, the court will decide whether to certify it as a class action
- Discovery: Both sides will exchange evidence, including internal communications and pricing data
- Settlement or Trial: Most class actions settle; if not, the case proceeds to jury trial
Previous Walmart Settlement Context
It’s worth noting Walmart’s settlement history. Walmart paid $45 million in 2024 to settle a class action claiming they charged customers inflated prices on certain weighted or bagged goods. Shoppers could apply for rebates capped at $500.
Why This Case Matters for Consumers
Beyond Pepsi Products
This lawsuit exposes how dominant retailers and suppliers can manipulate pricing across entire markets. The complaint claims the two companies collectively make more money when they “neutralize price competition and coordinate pricing”.
The Broader Impact
When a retailer controlling a quarter of the market gets special pricing, it’s not just about saving Walmart shoppers money—it’s about making everyone else pay more. Small, independent grocery stores can’t compete when they’re forced to pay higher wholesale prices than the retail giant down the street.
Frequently Asked Questions
How do I know if I’m part of this lawsuit?
If you purchased any Pepsi product (Pepsi, Mountain Dew, Gatorade, Aquafina, etc.) from any retailer except Walmart since January 2015, you’re potentially included. The court hasn’t certified the class yet, so no action is required now.
Do I need receipts to join?
Class certification hasn’t occurred yet. Typically, large consumer class actions allow claims without receipts, though amounts may be limited. Details will emerge if the class is certified.
When will I get money from this lawsuit?
Class action lawsuits take years to resolve. Even if successful, expect 2-4 years minimum before any settlement or judgment results in consumer payments.
Can I sue Pepsi and Walmart separately?
By participating in a certified class action, you typically waive your right to sue independently. However, you can opt out of the class if you want to pursue your own claim.
What if I shopped at both Walmart and other stores?
The class definition covers purchases at non-Walmart retailers. Your Walmart purchases wouldn’t be part of the claimed damages since the lawsuit alleges Walmart shoppers got lower prices.
Has anything like this happened before?
The FTC actively enforced the Robinson-Patman Act from the mid-20th century through the 1970s, but enforcement stalled in the 1980s. This represents a potential revival of price discrimination enforcement through private lawsuits.
What should I do now?
Monitor the lawsuit’s progress. If the class is certified, notice will be provided to potential class members with instructions on how to submit claims or opt out.
Key Takeaways
✓ Class action filed December 15, 2025, alleges decade-long price-fixing scheme
✓ Covers all Pepsi products purchased at non-Walmart stores since January 2015
✓ Lawsuit claims Pepsi gave Walmart preferential pricing while inflating prices for competitors
✓ Potential for treble damages under federal antitrust law
✓ Tens of millions of American consumers potentially affected
✓ Case is in early stages; class certification pending
✓ Both companies deny allegations and plan vigorous defense
Official Resources
- Federal Trade Commission – Robinson-Patman Act: https://www.ftc.gov/terms/robinson-patman
- DOJ Antitrust Division: https://www.justice.gov/atr
- Class Action Tracking: https://www.classaction.org
- FindLaw Price-Fixing Guide: https://www.findlaw.com/legalblogs/law-and-life/is-pepsi-in-hot-water-over-alleged-price-fixing-scheme-with-walmart/
Disclaimer: This article provides general information about the Pepsi-Walmart price-fixing lawsuit and is not legal advice. For specific guidance about your situation, consult a qualified attorney specializing in antitrust and class action litigation.
Last Updated: January 6, 2026
About the Author
Sarah Klein, JD, is a licensed attorney and legal content strategist with over 12 years of experience across civil, criminal, family, and regulatory law. At All About Lawyer, she covers a wide range of legal topics — from high-profile lawsuits and courtroom stories to state traffic laws and everyday legal questions — all with a focus on accuracy, clarity, and public understanding.
Her writing blends real legal insight with plain-English explanations, helping readers stay informed and legally aware.
Read more about Sarah