COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES

9 Months Ended

Nov. 05, 2022

COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES

COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES

7. COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES

The Company continuously evaluates contingencies based upon the best available evidence.

The Company believes that allowances for loss have been provided to the extent necessary and that its assessment of contingencies is reasonable.  To the extent that resolution of contingencies results in amounts that vary from the Company’s estimates, future earnings will be charged or credited.

The principal contingencies are described below:

Insurance — The Company’s workers’ compensation risks are self-insured in most states. In addition, other workers’ compensation risks and certain levels of insured general liability risks are based on retrospective premium plans, deductible plans, and self-insured retention plans.  The liability for workers’ compensation risks is accounted for on a present value basis.  Actual claim settlements and expenses incident thereto may differ from the provisions for loss.  Property risks have been underwritten by a subsidiary and are all reinsured with unrelated insurance companies.  Operating divisions and subsidiaries have paid premiums, and the insurance subsidiary has provided loss allowances, based upon actuarially determined estimates.

Litigation — Various claims and lawsuits arising in the normal course of business, including personal injury, contract disputes, employment discrimination, wage and hour and other regulatory claims are pending against the Company. Some of these suits purport or have been determined to be class actions and/or seek substantial damages. Although it is not possible at this time to evaluate the merits of all of these claims and lawsuits, nor their likelihood of success, the Company is of the belief that any resulting liability will not have a material effect on the Company’s financial position, results of operations, or cash flows.

The Company continually evaluates its exposure to loss contingencies arising from pending or threatened litigation and believes it has made provisions where it is reasonably possible to estimate and when an adverse outcome is probable. Nonetheless, assessing and predicting the outcomes of these matters involves substantial uncertainties. Management currently believes that the aggregate range of loss for the Company’s exposure is not material to the Company. It remains possible that despite management’s current belief, material differences in actual outcomes or changes in management’s evaluation or predictions could arise that could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s financial condition, results of operations, or cash flows.

The Company is one of dozens of companies that have been named in various lawsuits alleging that defendants contributed to create a public nuisance through the distribution and dispensing of opioids. At present, the Company is named in a significant number of lawsuits pending in various state courts as well as in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Ohio, where over 2,000 cases have been consolidated as Multi-District Litigation (“MDL”) pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §1407 in a case entitled In re National Prescription Opiate Litigation. Most of these cases have been stayed, but Kroger entities have been named in five cases that are proceeding on a staggered discovery schedule. Once discovery is completed, those cases will be remanded to the originating federal court for trial. The Company is vigorously defending these matters and believes that these cases are without merit. At this stage in the proceedings, the Company is unable to determine the probability of the outcome of these matters or the range of reasonably possible loss, if any.

In the third quarter of 2022, the Company recorded a charge of $85 relating to a settlement of opioid litigation claims with the State of New Mexico. The agreed upon settlement framework allocates $85 among various constituents related to the state of New Mexico. This settlement agreement is expected to resolve all opioid lawsuits and claims by the state of New Mexico against the Company. Kroger continues to vigorously defend against other claims and lawsuits relating to opioids.

Assignments — The Company is contingently liable for leases that have been assigned to various third parties in connection with facility closings and dispositions.  The Company could be required to satisfy the obligations under the leases if any of the assignees is unable to fulfill its lease obligations.  Due to the wide distribution of the Company’s assignments among third parties, and various other remedies available, the Company believes the likelihood that it will be required to assume a material amount of these obligations is remote.