Booker, Warren, Nadler Press Pepsi on Potentially Illegal Price Discrimination Against Small, Independently-Owned Grocery Stores

“Charging discriminatory, high prices to smaller, independent retailers harms those retailers’ ability to compete, and often forces consumers to endure unfair price increases.” “American families across the country continue to struggle to afford groceries, and enforcement of the [Robinson-Patman Act] is part of the solution to help promote competition throughout the food supply chain and ease their financial burden.”

May 12, 2025

WASHINGTON, D.C. — Today, U.S. Senators Cory Booker (D-NJ) and Elizabeth Warren (D-MA), along with U.S. Representative Jerry Nadler (D-NY), wrote to Ramon Laguarta, CEO of PepsiCo, Inc. (Pepsi) demanding an explanation for the company’s potentially illegal price discrimination against small and independent grocery stores. The lawmakers are the top Democrats on the Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on Antitrust, Competition Policy, and Consumer Rights, Senate Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs, and House Judiciary Subcommittee on the Administrate State, Regulatory Reform, and Antitrust, respectively.

In recent months, Pepsi has faced legal action from convenience stores and the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), a government regulator responsible for enforcing federal consumer protection laws and antitrust laws. In January 2025, the FTC sued Pepsi, accusing it of violating the Robinson-Patman Act (RPA), which prohibits sellers from engaging in anticompetitive price discrimination. The FTC claimed that for years, Pepsi has disadvantaged retailers – including local convenience stores – by consistently giving benefits and advantages, such as promotional payments, to a big-box store, while denying those same benefits to the store’s competitors.

In February 2025, two small, family-owned convenience stores accused Pepsi and its subsidiary Frito-Lay of violating the RPA, claiming the corporation charged independent retailers more “for identical bags of snack chips” compared to what it charged chain stores. The plaintiffs claimed they were charged as much as 50 percent more for those goods, and that the “discriminatory pricing” forced them to pass on the higher costs to consumers.

“The Robinson-Patman Act is an important tool for the FTC to combat illegal price discrimination and concentration, and to provide a level playing field to all businesses…Charging discriminatory, high prices to smaller, independent retailers harms those retailers’ ability to compete, and often forces consumers to endure unfair price increases,” wrote the lawmakers.

The RPA forbids sellers from charging competing buyers different prices for the same goods when the price discrimination may lessen or harm competition. The law also prohibits special promotional payments, discounts, rebates, allowances, or services to one buyer unless they are made available to all competing buyers.

“As food prices remain sky-high, the FTC should continue to enforce the RPA to promote fair competition in the food industry,” urged the lawmakers.

The bicameral coalition asked Pepsi to explain, by May 25, 2025, its pricing strategies, any discrepancies between what it charges chain retailers and small, independent retailers, how these price discrepancies affect shopping options for consumers, and the company’s lobbying efforts to refute price discrimination allegations.

To read the full text of the letter, click here.