Pesticide manufacturers Syngenta and Corteva must face a lawsuit from the state of Arkansas accusing them of suppressing competition for pesticide sales and keeping prices artificially high, a federal judge has ruled.
U.S. District Judge Brian Miller in Little Rock, Arkansas, said the state can pursue its claims that loyalty programs run by Syngenta and Corteva that provide rebates for pesticide purchases violate federal and state antitrust and consumer-protection laws.
Arkansas’ lawsuit claimed Syngenta and Corteva are paying pesticide distributors or retailers to restrict their purchase of generic crop-protection products that contain specific ingredients.
Read Also
Food and beverage makers’ sales predicted to slide on trade tensions: FCC
Canadian food and beverage makers have begun to feel the pinch of trade tensions with the U.S. according to a new forcast by Farm Credit Canada, which downgraded sales growth predictions from the start of the year.
The lawsuit said distributors and retailers fear losing their loyalty payments and so have no incentive to sell more generics.
Syngenta and Corteva did not immediately respond to requests for comment. They have denied any wrongdoing.
In a statement, Arkansas Attorney General Tim Griffin, a Republican, said the state “has legitimate claims against the anticompetitive rebate programs” of Syngenta and Corteva and will seek to “hold companies accountable for practices that harm the market and ultimately consumers.”
Syngenta and Corteva in seeking dismissal of the state’s lawsuit said their rebate programs lowered prices and denied they are anticompetitive.
They also said the state should have been barred from bringing antitrust claims on behalf of consumers.
Miller said the state had sufficiently alleged Arkansas residents were paying higher prices for pesticide products based on the claimed anticompetitive conduct.
Syngenta and Corteva are fighting other lawsuits challenging their loyalty programs.
In January, U.S. District Judge Thomas Schroeder in the Winston-Salem federal court said the companies must face some antitrust claims lodged by farmers in California, Texas, Florida and other states.
Schroeder last year also said that a related U.S. Federal Trade Commission lawsuit, filed with a bipartisan group of U.S. states, could move forward.
