COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES

9 Months Ended

Nov. 09, 2024

COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES

COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES

5. 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.

On September 8, 2023, the Company announced that it reached an agreement in principle with plaintiffs to settle the majority of opioid claims that have been or could be brought against Kroger by states in which they operate, subdivisions, and Native American tribes. Along with the execution of certain non-monetary conditions, the Company has agreed to pay up to $1,200 to states and subdivisions and $36 to Native American tribes in funding for abatement efforts, and approximately $177 to cover attorneys’ fees and costs. The exact payment amount will depend on several factors, including the extent to which states take action to foreclose opioid lawsuits by political subdivisions (e.g., by passing laws barring or limiting opioid lawsuits by political subdivisions), and the extent to which additional political subdivisions in participating states file additional opioid lawsuits against the Company. The settlement would allow for the full resolution of all claims on behalf of participating states, subdivisions and Native American tribes and is not an admission of any wrongdoing or liability. Certain opioid-related cases against the Company will remain pending in the multidistrict litigation and in various state courts after the settlement becomes effective, including those brought by non-participating states and subdivisions and private parties such as hospitals and third-party payors. The Company continues to defend these cases.

As a result, the Company concluded that the agreement in principle for the settlement of opioid claims was probable, and for which the related loss was reasonably estimable. Accordingly, in the second quarter of 2023, the Company recognized opioid settlement charges of $1,413, $1,113 net of tax, relating to the nationwide opioid settlement framework. This charge was included in “Operating, general and administrative” in the Company’s Consolidated Statement of Operations.

The agreement described above includes payments of approximately $1,236 and $177, in equal installments over 11 years and 6 years, respectively. As of November 9, 2024 and February 3, 2024, the Company recorded $284 and $1,129 of the estimated settlement liability in “Other current liabilities” and “Other long-term liabilities,” respectively, in the Company’s Consolidated Balance Sheets. In the first quarter of 2024, the Company made its first annual payment for $138 into an escrow account, which is recorded in “Prepaid and other current assets” in the Company’s Consolidated Balance Sheets. This escrow payment is recorded in “Prepaid and other current assets” within “Changes in operating assets and liabilities” in the Company’s Consolidated Statement of Cash Flows for the first three quarters ended November 9, 2024.

In the first three quarters of 2024, certain states and subdivisions confirmed their participation or lack of participation in the agreement described above, which resulted in immaterial changes to the settlement amount and timing of payments. On October 31, 2024, the Company determined that there is sufficient participation in the settlement by states and subdivisions and elected to proceed with the settlement. The settlement with states and subdivisions is currently anticipated to become effective on December 30, 2024, and the settlement with Native American tribes is currently anticipated to become effective on December 31, 2024.

In the first quarter of 2023, the Company recorded a charge of $62 relating to a settlement of opioid litigation claims with the State of West Virginia. The agreed upon settlement framework resolves all opioid lawsuits and claims by the West Virginia Attorney General.

The foregoing settlements are not admissions of wrongdoing or liability by the Company and the Company will continue to vigorously defend against any other claims and lawsuits relating to opioids that the settlements do not resolve, including private plaintiff litigation. The Company continues to believe it has strong legal defenses and appellate arguments in those cases.

Because of the many uncertainties associated with any settlement arrangement or other resolution of opioid-related litigation matters, and because the Company continues to actively defend ongoing litigation for which it believes it has defenses and assertions that have merit, the Company is not able to reasonably estimate the range of ultimate possible loss for all opioid-related litigation matters at this time.

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 are unable to fulfill their 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.