COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES	3 Months Ended
Mar. 26, 2017
Commitments and Contingencies Disclosure [Abstract]
COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES	COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES We are a party to many routine contracts in which we provide general indemnities in the normal course of business to third parties for various risks. Among other considerations, we have not recorded a liability for any of these indemnities as based upon the likelihood of payment, the fair value of such indemnities would not have a material impact on our financial condition, results of operations and cash flows. The Company is subject to various legal proceedings and claims which arise in the ordinary course of business. In the Company’s opinion, it has made appropriate and adequate accruals for claims where necessary; however, the ultimate liability for these matters is uncertain, and if significantly different than the amounts accrued, the ultimate outcome could have a material effect on the financial condition or results of operations of the Company. For a discussion of the material legal proceedings and claims, see Part II, Item 1. “Legal Proceedings.” Below is a summary of some of these material proceedings and claims. The Company believes it has substantial defenses to the claims made and intends to vigorously defend these cases. Tax Claims and Proceedings In 2009, the IRS asserted claims against the Company totaling $74.7 million. Pilgrim's entered into two Stipulations of Settled Issues agreements with the IRS (the “Stipulations”) on December 12, 2012 that accounted for approximately $29.3 million of the claims and should result in no additional tax due. The Company is currently working with the IRS to finalize the complete tax calculations associated with the Stipulations. Other Claims and Proceedings Between September 2, 2016 and October 13, 2016, a series of purported federal class action lawsuits were brought against Pilgrim's and 13 other producers by and on behalf of direct and indirect purchasers of broiler chickens alleging violations of federal and state antitrust and unfair competition laws. The complaints, which were filed with the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, seek, among other relief, treble damages for an alleged conspiracy among defendants to reduce output and increase prices of broiler chickens from the period of January 2008 to the present. Plaintiffs have filed three consolidated amended complaints: one on behalf of direct purchasers and two on behalf of distinct groups of indirect purchasers. Defendants (including the Company) moved to dismiss all complaints on January 27, 2017, which Plaintiffs opposed on March 15, 2017. Reply briefs are due on April 12, 2017. The Company believes we have strong defenses in response to plaintiffs’ allegations and intend to contest the action vigorously. On October 10, 2016, Patrick Hogan, acting on behalf of himself and putative class of persons who purchased shares of Pilgrim’s common stock between February 21, 2014 and October 4, 2016, filed a class action complaint in the U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado against the Company and its named executive officers. The complaint alleges, among other things, that the Company’s SEC filings contained statements that were rendered materially false and misleading by its failure to disclose that (i) Pilgrim's colluded with several of its industry peers to fix prices in the broiler chicken market as alleged in the In re Broiler Chicken Antitrust Litigation, (ii) the Company's conduct constituted a violation of federal antitrust laws, (iii) Pilgrim's revenues during the class period were the result of illegal conduct and (iv) the Company lacked effective internal control over financial reporting, as well as stating that Pilgrim's industry was anticompetitive. On April 4, 2017, the Court appointed another shareholder, George James Fuller, as lead plaintiff. Fuller has not yet filed a consolidated amended complaint, and the Court has not set a briefing schedule for defendants’ motion to dismiss. On January 27, 2017, a purported class action on behalf of broiler chicken farmers was brought against Pilgrim's and 4 other producers in the Eastern District of Oklahoma, alleging, among other things, a conspiracy to reduce competition for grower services and depress the price paid to growers. Plaintiffs allege violations of the Sherman Act and the Packers and Stockyards Act and seek, among other relief, treble damages. Answers or responses to the complaint are due on April 28, 2017. The Company believes they have strong defenses in response to plaintiffs' allegations and intend to contest these actions vigorously. On March 9, 2017, a shareholder derivative action styled DiSalvio v. Lovette, et al., No. 2017 cv. 30207, was brought against all of Pilgrim’s directors and its Chief Financial Officer, Fabio Sandri, in the District Court for the County of Weld in Colorado. The complaint alleges, among other things, that the named defendants breached their fiduciary duties by failing to prevent the Company and its officers from engaging in an antitrust conspiracy as alleged in the In re Broiler Chicken Antitrust Litigation, and issuing false and misleading statements as alleged in the Hogan class action litigation. Plaintiff has agreed to stay the action pending the resolution of any motion to dismiss in the Hogan class action litigation. The Company cannot predict the outcome of these actions nor when they will be resolved. If the plaintiffs were to prevail in any of these litigations, Pilgrim's could be liable for damages, which could be material and could adversely affect its financial condition or results of operations.

COMMITMENTS AND CONTINGENCIES

We are a party to many routine contracts in which we provide general indemnities in the normal course of business to third parties for various risks. Among other considerations, we have not recorded a liability for any of these indemnities as based upon the likelihood of payment, the fair value of such indemnities would not have a material impact on our financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.

The Company is subject to various legal proceedings and claims which arise in the ordinary course of business. In the Company’s opinion, it has made appropriate and adequate accruals for claims where necessary; however, the ultimate liability for these matters is uncertain, and if significantly different than the amounts accrued, the ultimate outcome could have a material effect on the financial condition or results of operations of the Company. For a discussion of the material legal proceedings and claims, see Part II, Item 1. “Legal Proceedings.” Below is a summary of some of these material proceedings and claims. The Company believes it has substantial defenses to the claims made and intends to vigorously defend these cases.

Tax Claims and Proceedings

In 2009, the IRS asserted claims against the Company totaling $74.7 million. Pilgrim's entered into two Stipulations of Settled Issues agreements with the IRS (the “Stipulations”) on December 12, 2012 that accounted for approximately $29.3 million of the claims and should result in no additional tax due. The Company is currently working with the IRS to finalize the complete tax calculations associated with the Stipulations.

Other Claims and Proceedings

Between September 2, 2016 and October 13, 2016, a series of purported federal class action lawsuits were brought against Pilgrim's and 13 other producers by and on behalf of direct and indirect purchasers of broiler chickens alleging violations of federal and state antitrust and unfair competition laws. The complaints, which were filed with the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, seek, among other relief, treble damages for an alleged conspiracy among defendants to reduce output and increase prices of broiler chickens from the period of January 2008 to the present. Plaintiffs have filed three consolidated amended complaints: one on behalf of direct purchasers and two on behalf of distinct groups of indirect purchasers. Defendants (including the Company) moved to dismiss all complaints on January 27, 2017, which Plaintiffs opposed on March 15, 2017. Reply briefs are due on April 12, 2017. The Company believes we have strong defenses in response to plaintiffs’ allegations and intend to contest the action vigorously.

On October 10, 2016, Patrick Hogan, acting on behalf of himself and putative class of persons who purchased shares of Pilgrim’s common stock between February 21, 2014 and October 4, 2016, filed a class action complaint in the U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado against the Company and its named executive officers. The complaint alleges, among other things, that the Company’s SEC filings contained statements that were rendered materially false and misleading by its failure to disclose that (i) Pilgrim's colluded with several of its industry peers to fix prices in the broiler chicken market as alleged in the In re Broiler Chicken Antitrust Litigation, (ii) the Company's conduct constituted a violation of federal antitrust laws, (iii) Pilgrim's revenues during the class period were the result of illegal conduct and (iv) the Company lacked effective internal control over financial reporting, as well as stating that Pilgrim's industry was anticompetitive. On April 4, 2017, the Court appointed another shareholder, George James Fuller, as lead plaintiff. Fuller has not yet filed a consolidated amended complaint, and the Court has not set a briefing schedule for defendants’ motion to dismiss.

On January 27, 2017, a purported class action on behalf of broiler chicken farmers was brought against Pilgrim's and 4 other producers in the Eastern District of Oklahoma, alleging, among other things, a conspiracy to reduce competition for grower services and depress the price paid to growers. Plaintiffs allege violations of the Sherman Act and the Packers and Stockyards Act and seek, among other relief, treble damages. Answers or responses to the complaint are due on April 28, 2017. The Company believes they have strong defenses in response to plaintiffs' allegations and intend to contest these actions vigorously.

On March 9, 2017, a shareholder derivative action styled DiSalvio v. Lovette, et al., No. 2017 cv. 30207, was brought against all of Pilgrim’s directors and its Chief Financial Officer, Fabio Sandri, in the District Court for the County of Weld in Colorado. The complaint alleges, among other things, that the named defendants breached their fiduciary duties by failing to prevent the Company and its officers from engaging in an antitrust conspiracy as alleged in the In re Broiler Chicken Antitrust Litigation, and issuing false and misleading statements as alleged in the Hogan class action litigation. Plaintiff has agreed to stay the action pending the resolution of any motion to dismiss in the Hogan class action litigation.

The Company cannot predict the outcome of these actions nor when they will be resolved. If the plaintiffs were to prevail in any of these litigations, Pilgrim's could be liable for damages, which could be material and could adversely affect its financial condition or results of operations.