Penalty Amount
$35,000,000
Colorado, the FTC, and a coalition of state attorneys general reached a settlement with Corteva over allegations that its post-patent loyalty program restricted distributors from selling competing generic pesticides. Corteva must end the challenged conduct and pay the states $35 million for fees and costs; the agreement is in effect for 10 years.
Corteva must dismantle its pesticide loyalty program, stop specified exclusionary and discriminatory conduct toward customers and distributors, and pay the states $35 million for fees and costs. The agreement remains in effect for 10 years.
Review distributor, reseller, and customer agreements for exclusivity, loyalty, rebate, and volume-incentive provisions that could discourage customers from purchasing competing or generic products, especially after patent expiration. Check that distribution and pricing terms do not penalize or threaten customers for dealing with competitors, and ensure sales policies and contract language align with any applicable competition-law obligations. This action concerns antitrust conduct rather than privacy practices, so it does not itself indicate a need to revise data-processing or breach-notification clauses.
Entity
Corteva, Inc.
Industry
OtherOfficial Press Release
https://coag.gov/press-releases/colorado-ftc-settlement-with-corteva-inc-lowers-pesticide-prices-for-farmers/
SyngentaCrop JointMotionforStipulatedOrder
https://www.ftc.gov/system/files/ftc_gov/pdf/SyngentaCrop-JointMotionforStipulatedOrder.pdf
Colorado Attorney General Enforcement Page
https://coag.gov/
"a settlement agreement with pesticide manufacturing giant Corteva, Inc."
"the agreement requires Corteva to pay the states $35 million to cover their fees and costs."
"Corteva implemented a post-patent loyalty program that paid distributors to block competitors from selling cheaper generic products to farmers."
"Corteva will dismantle its existing pesticides loyalty program"
"Sept. 28, 2026"
$183.5M
Colorado and other states settled allegations that Acima deceptively advertised rent-to-own agreements, concealed markups and fees, and automatically placed consumers into more expensive 12-month payment plans. The settlement requires changes to Acima’s practices and provides lease forgiveness and restitution to Colorado consumers, as well as payment to the state.
$60.0M
Colorado and other states reached a settlement with Family Dollar after finding that customers were charged more at checkout than prices advertised or shown on shelves. The settlement calls for consumer restitution and discounts, a Colorado payment, and requirements for pricing controls, assessments, reporting, and consumer notices.
$48.5M
A multistate investigation found that Progress Residential misled renters through false rental-price advertising and hidden fees, and failed to properly inspect or repair homes and address serious maintenance and billing concerns. The settlement requires clearer fee disclosures and bars improper fees, among other requirements, and requires the company to pay $48.5 million to the FTC and the states.
$130K
Colorado settled allegations that Urban Talent Management and Style Incorporated used unfair paid-training contracts and lending practices, including unlawful contract terms, excessive fees, and inadequate lending disclosures. The companies agreed to stop offering paid training in Colorado, notify affected consumers, halt collection on specified accounts and debt, pay $10,000 in investigation costs, and accept a $120,000 suspended penalty conditioned on compliance.
$220.0M
General Motors agreed to a nationwide $220 million settlement over allegations that it sold drivers’ identifiable driving behavior and location data to data brokers, which then sold it to insurers. The settlement requires affirmative express consent before collecting or disclosing driving and location data, limits data collection, and imposes privacy-program assessments and dealership oversight and training.
Colorado, the FTC, and a bipartisan group of state attorneys general sued Toast, alleging misleading claims about its subscription services and financial products, undisclosed fees, and obstacles to cancelling subscriptions. The coalition is asking the court for an injunction, monetary relief, civil penalties, and other relief; the press release does not report an imposed penalty.