Commitments and contingencies	9 Months Ended
May 31, 2023
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]
Commitments and contingencies	Commitments and contingencies The Company is involved in legal proceedings arising in the normal course of its business, including litigation, arbitration and other claims, and investigations, inspections, subpoenas, audits, claims, inquiries and similar actions by governmental authorities in pharmacy, healthcare, tax and other areas. Some of these proceedings may be class actions, and some involve claims for large or indeterminate amounts, including punitive or exemplary damages, and they may remain unresolved for several years. Legal proceedings in general, and securities, class action and multi-district litigation, in particular, can be expensive and disruptive. From time to time, the Company is also involved in legal proceedings as a plaintiff involving antitrust, tax, contract, intellectual property and other matters. Gain contingencies, if any, are recognized when they are realized. The Company is subject to extensive regulation by national, state and local government agencies in the U.S. and other countries in which it operates. The Company’s business, compliance and reporting practices are subject to intensive scrutiny under applicable regulation, including review or audit by regulatory authorities. As a result, the Company regularly is the subject of government actions of the types described herein. The Company also may be named from time to time in qui tam actions initiated by private parties. In such an action, a private party purports to act on behalf of federal or state governments, alleges that false claims have been submitted for payment by the government and may receive an award if its claims are successful. After a private party has filed a qui tam action, the government must investigate the private party's claim and determine whether to intervene in and take control over the litigation. These actions may remain under seal while the government makes this determination. If the government declines to intervene, the private party may nonetheless continue to pursue the litigation on its own purporting to act on behalf of the government. The results of legal proceedings, including government investigations, are often uncertain and difficult to predict, and the costs incurred in these matters can be substantial, regardless of the outcome. In addition, as a result of governmental investigations or proceedings, the Company may be subject to damages, civil or criminal fines or penalties, or other sanctions, including the possible suspension or loss of licensure and suspension or exclusion from participation in government programs. The Company describes below certain proceedings against the Company in which the amount of loss could be material. The Company accrues for legal claims when, and to the extent that, the amount or range of probable loss can be reasonably estimated. The Company believes we have meritorious defenses in each of these proceedings, and we intend to defend each case vigorously, but there can be no assurance as to the ultimate outcome. With respect to litigation and other legal proceedings where the Company has determined a material loss is reasonably possible, except as otherwise disclosed, we are not able to make a reasonable estimate of the amount or range of loss that is reasonably possible above any accrued amounts in these proceedings, due to various reasons, including: we have factual and legal arguments that, if successful, will eliminate or sharply reduce the possibility of loss; we do not have sufficient information about the arguments and the evidence plaintiffs will advance with respect to their damages; some of the cases have been stayed; certain proceedings present novel and complex questions of public policy; legal and factual determinations and judicial and governmental procedure; the large number of parties involved; and the inherent uncertainties related to such litigation. Litigation Relating to 2016 Goals On December 29, 2014, a putative shareholder filed a derivative action in federal court in the Northern District of Illinois against certain current and former directors and officers of Walgreen Co. and Walgreen Co., as a nominal defendant, arising out of certain public statements the Company made regarding its former fiscal 2016 goals. (Cutler v. Wasson et al., No. 1:14-cv-10408 (N.D. Ill.)) The action asserts claims for breach of fiduciary duty, waste and unjust enrichment. On May 18, 2015, the case was stayed in light of a securities class action that was filed on April 10, 2015 (Washtenaw County Employees’ Retirement System v. Walgreen Co. et al., No. 1:15-cv-3187 (N.D. Ill.). On November 3, 2016, the Court entered a stipulation and order extending the stay until the resolution of the securities class action. The securities class action was resolved and a final judgement order entered on October 13, 2022. On March 24, 2023, the plaintiff filed a motion for preliminary approval of a settlement resolving the litigation. On May 8, 2023 the Court entered an order preliminarily approving the settlement and setting a final approval hearing for July 25, 2023. On April 10, 2015, a putative shareholder filed a securities class action in federal court in the Northern District of Illinois against Walgreen Co. and certain former officers of Walgreen Co. (Washtenaw County Employees’ Retirement System v. Walgreen Co. et al., No. 1:15-cv-3187 (N.D. Ill.)) The action asserts claims for violation of the federal securities laws arising out of certain public statements the Company made regarding its former fiscal 2016 goals. On June 29, 2022 the Court granted preliminary approval of a settlement in the amount of $105 million, which was paid in fiscal 2022. The Court issued a final judgment order approving the settlement on October 13, 2022. Securities Claims Relating to Rite-Aid Merger On December 11, 2017, purported Rite Aid shareholders filed an amended complaint in a putative class action lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania (the “M.D. Pa. class action”) arising out of transactions contemplated by the merger agreement between the Company and Rite Aid. The amended complaint alleges that the Company and certain of its officers made false or misleading statements regarding the transactions. Fact and expert discovery have concluded. The Court denied both plaintiffs’ partial motion for summary judgement and the Company’s motion for summary judgment on March 31, 2023. Trial is scheduled for January 29, 2024. In October and December 2020, two separate purported Rite Aid Shareholders filed actions in the same court opting out of the class in the M.D. Pa. class action and making nearly identical allegations as those in the M.D. Pa. class action (the “Opt-out Actions”). The stay in the Opt-out Actions has been lifted following the Court’s rulings on summary judgment motions in the M.D.Pa. class action. No trial date has been set. Claims Relating to Opioid Abuse On May 5, 2022, the Company announced that it had entered into a settlement agreement with the State of Florida to resolve all claims related to the distribution and dispensing of prescription opioid medications across the Company’s pharmacies in the State of Florida. This settlement agreement was not an admission of liability or wrong-doing and resolved all pending and future opioid litigation by state and government subdivisions in the State of Florida. The settlement amount of $683 million includes $620 million in remediation payments, which will be paid to the State of Florida in equal installments over 18 years, and will be applied as opioid remediation, as well as a one-time payment of $63 million for attorneys’ fees. In fiscal 2022, the Company recorded a $683 million liability associated with this settlement. On November 2, 2022, the Company announced that it had agreed to financial amounts and payment terms as part of settlement frameworks (the “Settlement Frameworks”) that had the potential to resolve a substantial majority of opioid-related lawsuits filed against the Company by the attorneys general of participating states and political subdivisions (the “Settling States”) and litigation brought by counsel for tribes. Under the Settlement Frameworks with the Settling States and counsel for tribes, the Company announced that it expected to settle all opioid claims against it by such Settling States, their participating political subdivisions, and participating tribes for up to approximately $4.8 billion and $155 million, respectively in remediation payments to be paid out over 15 years. The Settlement Frameworks provided for the payment of up to approximately $754 million in attorneys’ fees and costs over 6 years beginning in year two of the Settlement Frameworks. The Settlement Frameworks included no admission of wrongdoing or liability by the Company. As of November 30, 2022, the Company concluded that Settlement Framework discussions had advanced to a stage where a broad settlement of opioid claims by Settling States was probable, and for which the related loss was reasonably estimable. As a result of those conclusions and the Company’s ongoing assessment of other opioid-related claims, the Company recorded a $6.5 billion liability associated with the Settlement Frameworks and other opioid-related claims and litigation settlements during the three months ended November 30, 2022. The settlement accrual was reflected in the Consolidated Condensed Statement of Earnings within Selling, general and administrative expenses as part of the U.S. Retail Pharmacy segment. On December 9, 2022, the Company committed the Settlement Frameworks to a proposed settlement agreement (the “Proposed Settlement Agreement”) that was contingent on (1) a sufficient number of Settling States, including those that had not sued, agreeing to the Proposed Settlement Agreement following a sign-on period, and (2) following a notice period, a sufficient number of political subdivisions within Settling States, including those that had not sued, agreeing to the Proposed Settlement Agreement (or otherwise having their claims foreclosed). On June 8, 2023 the Company informed the Settling States that there was sufficient State participation, sufficient Subdivision participation, and sufficient resolution of the claims of Litigating Subdivisions in the Settling States to proceed with the multistate settlement. The Company has now resolved its litigation with all states, territories, tribes and 99.5% of litigating subdivisions within Settling States included in the Proposed Settlement or in separate agreements. Estimated liabilities for these settlements are fully accrued. Incentive payments to Settling States with non-participating political subdivisions are subject to reduction and those subdivisions are still entitled to pursue their claims against the Company. The Proposed Settlement Agreement will become effective on August 7, 2023. The Company will continue to vigorously defend against any litigation not covered by the Proposed Settlement Agreement, including private plaintiff litigation. The Company continues to believe it has strong legal defenses and appellate arguments in all of these cases. As of May 31, 2023, the Company has accrued a total $7.4 billion liability associated with the Proposed Settlement Agreement and other opioid-related claims and litigation settlements, including $1.0 billion and $6.4 billion of the estimated settlement liability in Accrued expenses and other current liabilities, and Accrued litigation obligations, respectively, in the Consolidated Condensed Balance Sheet. The Company remains a defendant in multiple actions in federal courts alleging claims generally concerning the impacts of widespread opioid abuse, which have been commenced by various plaintiffs. In December 2017, the U.S. Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation consolidated many of these cases in a consolidated multidistrict litigation, captioned In re National Prescription Opiate Litigation (MDL No. 2804, Case No. 17-md-2804), which is pending in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Ohio (“N.D. Ohio”). The Company is a defendant in the following multidistrict litigation (MDL) bellwether cases: •Two consolidated cases in N.D. Ohio (Cnty. of Lake, Ohio v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et al., Case No. 18-op-45032; Cnty. of Trumbull, Ohio v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et al., Case No. 18-op-45079). In November 2021, the jury returned a verdict in favor of the plaintiffs as to liability, and a second trial regarding remedies took place in May 2022. In August 2022, the court entered orders providing for injunctive relief and requiring the defendants to pay $651 million over a 15-year period to fund abatement programs. The court found that the damages are subject to joint and several liability and as such made no determination as to apportionment. These decisions are currently on appeal. The Company also has been named as a defendant in numerous actions brought in state courts relating to opioid matters. Trial dates have been set in cases pending in state courts in the following states: •Maryland (Mayor and City Council of Baltimore v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et al., Case No. 24-C-18-000515, Circuit Court for Baltimore City, Baltimore, Maryland - September 2024). •Florida (Florida Health Sciences Center, Inc., et al. v. Richard Sackler, et al., Case No. CACE 19-018882, Seventeenth Judicial Circuit Court, Broward County, Florida - May 2025). The relief sought by various plaintiffs in these matters includes compensatory, abatement, restitution and punitive damages, as well as injunctive relief. Additionally, the Company has received from the U.S. Department of Justice (“DOJ”) and the Attorneys General of numerous states subpoenas, civil investigative demands, and other requests concerning opioid-related matters. The Company continues to communicate with the DOJ regarding purported violations of the federal Controlled Substances Act and the federal False Claims Act in dispensing prescriptions for opioids and other controlled substances at its pharmacies nationwide. Usual and Customary Pricing Litigation The Company is defending a number of claims, lawsuits and investigations that allege that the Company’s retail pharmacies overcharged for prescription drugs by not submitting the correct usual and customary price during the claims adjudication process. These actions have been brought by different types of plaintiffs, including insurance companies, plan members, government and private payors, based on different legal theories. The Company has appropriately accrued for these matters, based on each matter's unique facts and circumstances. As of May 31, 2023, the Company has accrued an estimated liability of approximately $304 million for these matters. Loss contingencies are highly subjective and unpredictable and unfavorable developments can occur. The amount of the actual loss may differ materially from the accrual estimate. In one such case, Humana initiated an arbitration before the American Arbitration Association. At the conclusion of that matter, the arbitrator issued an award in Humana’s favor in the amount of $642 million. The Company has asked a federal court to vacate that award.

The Company is involved in legal proceedings arising in the normal course of its business, including litigation, arbitration and other claims, and investigations, inspections, subpoenas, audits, claims, inquiries and similar actions by governmental authorities in pharmacy, healthcare, tax and other areas. Some of these proceedings may be class actions, and some involve claims for large or indeterminate amounts, including punitive or exemplary damages, and they may remain unresolved for several years. Legal proceedings in general, and securities, class action and multi-district litigation, in particular, can be expensive and disruptive.

The Company is subject to extensive regulation by national, state and local government agencies in the U.S. and other countries in which it operates. The Company’s business, compliance and reporting practices are subject to intensive scrutiny under applicable regulation, including review or audit by regulatory authorities. As a result, the Company regularly is the subject of government actions of the types described herein. The Company also may be named from time to time in qui tam actions initiated by private parties. In such an action, a private party purports to act on behalf of federal or state governments, alleges that false claims have been submitted for payment by the government and may receive an award if its claims are successful. After a private party has filed a qui tam action, the government must investigate the private party's claim and determine whether to intervene in and take control over the litigation. These actions may remain under seal while the government makes this determination. If the government declines to intervene, the private party may nonetheless continue to pursue the litigation on its own purporting to act on behalf of the government.

The results of legal proceedings, including government investigations, are often uncertain and difficult to predict, and the costs incurred in these matters can be substantial, regardless of the outcome. In addition, as a result of governmental investigations or proceedings, the Company may be subject to damages, civil or criminal fines or penalties, or other sanctions, including the possible suspension or loss of licensure and suspension or exclusion from participation in government programs.

The Company describes below certain proceedings against the Company in which the amount of loss could be material. The Company accrues for legal claims when, and to the extent that, the amount or range of probable loss can be reasonably estimated. The Company believes we have meritorious defenses in each of these proceedings, and we intend to defend each case vigorously, but there can be no assurance as to the ultimate outcome. With respect to litigation and other legal proceedings where the Company has determined a material loss is reasonably possible, except as otherwise disclosed, we are not able to make a reasonable estimate of the amount or range of loss that is reasonably possible above any accrued amounts in these proceedings, due to various reasons, including: we have factual and legal arguments that, if successful, will eliminate or sharply reduce the possibility of loss; we do not have sufficient information about the arguments and the evidence plaintiffs will advance with respect to their damages; some of the cases have been stayed; certain proceedings present novel and complex questions of public policy; legal and factual determinations and judicial and governmental procedure; the large number of parties involved; and the inherent uncertainties related to such litigation.

On December 29, 2014, a putative shareholder filed a derivative action in federal court in the Northern District of Illinois against certain current and former directors and officers of Walgreen Co. and Walgreen Co., as a nominal defendant, arising out of certain public statements the Company made regarding its former fiscal 2016 goals. (Cutler v. Wasson et al., No. 1:14-cv-10408 (N.D. Ill.)) The action asserts claims for breach of fiduciary duty, waste and unjust enrichment. On May 18, 2015, the case was stayed in light of a securities class action that was filed on April 10, 2015 (Washtenaw County Employees’ Retirement System v. Walgreen Co. et al., No. 1:15-cv-3187 (N.D. Ill.). On November 3, 2016, the Court entered a stipulation and order extending the stay until the resolution of the securities class action. The securities class action was resolved and a final judgement order entered on October 13, 2022. On March 24, 2023, the plaintiff filed a motion for preliminary approval of a settlement resolving the litigation. On May 8, 2023 the Court entered an order preliminarily approving the settlement and setting a final approval hearing for July 25, 2023.

On April 10, 2015, a putative shareholder filed a securities class action in federal court in the Northern District of Illinois against Walgreen Co. and certain former officers of Walgreen Co. (Washtenaw County Employees’ Retirement System v. Walgreen Co. et al., No. 1:15-cv-3187 (N.D. Ill.)) The action asserts claims for violation of the federal securities laws arising out of certain public statements the Company made regarding its former fiscal 2016 goals. On June 29, 2022 the Court granted preliminary approval of a settlement in the amount of $105 million, which was paid in fiscal 2022. The Court issued a final judgment order approving the settlement on October 13, 2022.

On December 11, 2017, purported Rite Aid shareholders filed an amended complaint in a putative class action lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania (the “M.D. Pa. class action”) arising out of transactions contemplated by the merger agreement between the Company and Rite Aid. The amended complaint alleges that the Company and certain of its officers made false or misleading statements regarding the transactions. Fact and expert discovery have concluded. The Court denied both plaintiffs’ partial motion for summary judgement and the Company’s motion for summary judgment on March 31, 2023. Trial is scheduled for January 29, 2024.

In October and December 2020, two separate purported Rite Aid Shareholders filed actions in the same court opting out of the class in the M.D. Pa. class action and making nearly identical allegations as those in the M.D. Pa. class action (the “Opt-out Actions”). The stay in the Opt-out Actions has been lifted following the Court’s rulings on summary judgment motions in the M.D.Pa. class action. No trial date has been set.

On May 5, 2022, the Company announced that it had entered into a settlement agreement with the State of Florida to resolve all claims related to the distribution and dispensing of prescription opioid medications across the Company’s pharmacies in the State of Florida. This settlement agreement was not an admission of liability or wrong-doing and resolved all pending and future opioid litigation by state and government subdivisions in the State of Florida. The settlement amount of $683 million includes $620 million in remediation payments, which will be paid to the State of Florida in equal installments over 18 years, and will be applied as opioid remediation, as well as a one-time payment of $63 million for attorneys’ fees. In fiscal 2022, the Company recorded a $683 million liability associated with this settlement.

On November 2, 2022, the Company announced that it had agreed to financial amounts and payment terms as part of settlement frameworks (the “Settlement Frameworks”) that had the potential to resolve a substantial majority of opioid-related lawsuits filed against the Company by the attorneys general of participating states and political subdivisions (the “Settling States”) and litigation brought by counsel for tribes. Under the Settlement Frameworks with the Settling States and counsel for tribes, the Company announced that it expected to settle all opioid claims against it by such Settling States, their participating political subdivisions, and participating tribes for up to approximately $4.8 billion and $155 million, respectively in remediation payments to be paid out over 15 years. The Settlement Frameworks provided for the payment of up to approximately $754 million in attorneys’ fees and costs over 6 years beginning in year two of the Settlement Frameworks. The Settlement Frameworks included no admission of wrongdoing or liability by the Company.

As of November 30, 2022, the Company concluded that Settlement Framework discussions had advanced to a stage where a broad settlement of opioid claims by Settling States was probable, and for which the related loss was reasonably estimable. As a result of those conclusions and the Company’s ongoing assessment of other opioid-related claims, the Company recorded a $6.5 billion liability associated with the Settlement Frameworks and other opioid-related claims and litigation settlements during the three months ended November 30, 2022. The settlement accrual was reflected in the Consolidated Condensed Statement of Earnings within Selling, general and administrative expenses as part of the U.S. Retail Pharmacy segment.

On December 9, 2022, the Company committed the Settlement Frameworks to a proposed settlement agreement (the “Proposed Settlement Agreement”) that was contingent on (1) a sufficient number of Settling States, including those that had not sued, agreeing to the Proposed Settlement Agreement following a sign-on period, and (2) following a notice period, a sufficient number of political subdivisions within Settling States, including those that had not sued, agreeing to the Proposed Settlement Agreement (or otherwise having their claims foreclosed). On June 8, 2023 the Company informed the Settling States that there was sufficient State participation, sufficient Subdivision participation, and sufficient resolution of the claims of Litigating Subdivisions in the Settling States to proceed with the multistate settlement. The Company has now resolved its litigation with all states, territories, tribes and 99.5% of litigating subdivisions within Settling States included in the Proposed Settlement or in separate agreements. Estimated liabilities for these settlements are fully accrued. Incentive payments to Settling States with non-participating political subdivisions are subject to reduction and those subdivisions are still entitled to pursue their claims against the Company.

The Proposed Settlement Agreement will become effective on August 7, 2023. The Company will continue to vigorously defend against any litigation not covered by the Proposed Settlement Agreement, including private plaintiff litigation. The Company continues to believe it has strong legal defenses and appellate arguments in all of these cases.

As of May 31, 2023, the Company has accrued a total $7.4 billion liability associated with the Proposed Settlement Agreement and other opioid-related claims and litigation settlements, including $1.0 billion and $6.4 billion of the estimated settlement liability in Accrued expenses and other current liabilities, and Accrued litigation obligations, respectively, in the Consolidated Condensed Balance Sheet.

The Company remains a defendant in multiple actions in federal courts alleging claims generally concerning the impacts of widespread opioid abuse, which have been commenced by various plaintiffs. In December 2017, the U.S. Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation consolidated many of these cases in a consolidated multidistrict litigation, captioned In re National Prescription Opiate Litigation (MDL No. 2804, Case No. 17-md-2804), which is pending in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Ohio (“N.D. Ohio”). The Company is a defendant in the following multidistrict litigation (MDL) bellwether cases:

•Two consolidated cases in N.D. Ohio (Cnty. of Lake, Ohio v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et al., Case No. 18-op-45032; Cnty. of Trumbull, Ohio v. Purdue Pharma L.P., et al., Case No. 18-op-45079). In November 2021, the jury returned a verdict in favor of the plaintiffs as to liability, and a second trial regarding remedies took place in May 2022. In August 2022, the court entered orders providing for injunctive relief and requiring the defendants to pay $651 million over a 15-year period to fund abatement programs. The court found that the damages are subject to joint and several liability and as such made no determination as to apportionment. These decisions are currently on appeal.

The relief sought by various plaintiffs in these matters includes compensatory, abatement, restitution and punitive damages, as well as injunctive relief. Additionally, the Company has received from the U.S. Department of Justice (“DOJ”) and the Attorneys General of numerous states subpoenas, civil investigative demands, and other requests concerning opioid-related matters. The Company continues to communicate with the DOJ regarding purported violations of the federal Controlled Substances Act and the federal False Claims Act in dispensing prescriptions for opioids and other controlled substances at its pharmacies nationwide.

The Company is defending a number of claims, lawsuits and investigations that allege that the Company’s retail pharmacies overcharged for prescription drugs by not submitting the correct usual and customary price during the claims adjudication process. These actions have been brought by different types of plaintiffs, including insurance companies, plan members, government and private payors, based on different legal theories. The Company has appropriately accrued for these matters, based on each matter's unique facts and circumstances. As of May 31, 2023, the Company has accrued an estimated liability of approximately $304 million for these matters. Loss contingencies are highly subjective and unpredictable and unfavorable developments can occur. The amount of the actual loss may differ materially from the accrual estimate. In one such case, Humana initiated an arbitration before the American Arbitration Association. At the conclusion of that matter, the arbitrator issued an award in Humana’s favor in the amount of $642 million. The Company has asked a federal court to vacate that award.