The Federal Trade Commission and 12 states sued Corteva in 2022, alleging it paid pesticide distributors to keep cheaper generic versions of its off-patent products away from farmers. Corteva has now agreed to drop that program, accept limits on its rebates for 10 years, and pay the states $35 million.
The deal is a stipulated order filed September 25 in federal court in North Carolina and announced by the FTC on September 28. It binds Corteva once the judge signs it. Corteva admits none of the allegations: the order "does not constitute an admission by Corteva that the acts alleged in the Amended Complaint are true".
The line moves to 50 percent
The amended complaint alleged that under one of the two Corteva programs it challenged, a distributor earned its year-end rebate for an ingredient only by buying a set share of it from Corteva, a threshold of "generally at least 85%".
The order bars Corteva from loyalty programs that tie a payment or other benefit to a distributor buying more than 50 percent of its needs for an off-patent Corteva ingredient from Corteva, or to holding its generic purchases under 50 percent. It also bars rebates tied to meeting several targets at once or to loyalty in later years, volume programs meant to recreate the banned terms, and retaliation against distributors that deal with generic makers.
It covers every Corteva ingredient past its compound patent, not only the three the complaint used as examples: the herbicides rimsulfuron and acetochlor and the insecticide oxamyl, used on crops from corn and cotton to potatoes.
Corteva may still reward a distributor that buys up to half of an ingredient from it. It may set share targets of up to 50 percent across a whole category, such as "herbicides for corn and soybean". It may discount the units bought past a target, as long as the discount does not reach back to earlier units or push the price below Corteva's average variable cost. And it need not change pricing programs in use as of August 2025 other than the ones the plaintiffs challenged.
The $35 million belongs to the states
Corteva will pay $35,000,000 to California, Colorado, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Minnesota, Nebraska, Oregon, Tennessee, Texas, Washington and Wisconsin. The states decide the split, and their attorneys general choose among seven permitted uses, from legal fees to anything they deem appropriate under state law. One is "for distribution to farmers as deemed appropriate by any State's Attorney General, including for a restitutionary purpose". No state has to choose it.
Syngenta's case goes on
The same lawsuit accuses Syngenta of a similar program, naming azoxystrobin, mesotrione and metolachlor. The FTC's release says: "Litigation against Syngenta remains ongoing." Summary judgment briefing ended March 20, 2026, and the court heard argument on Syngenta's motion on July 30. Corteva has agreed to help the plaintiffs with trial witnesses and documents.
What to watch
- September 30, 2026. Under the order, rebates already earned under the old programs may be paid only for the market year ending that day, and without any share threshold above 50 percent.
- When the judge signs. The order binds Corteva from then, for 10 years.
- Within 30 days of signing. Corteva must post an "Antitrust Compliance" link on its website for three years and send the order to distributors that were in the banned programs. The $35 million is due in those 30 days if the states send payment instructions at least 10 days before the deadline, or 15 days after late instructions arrive.
- Compliance concerns. The notice the order prescribes points to FTCOrderCompliance@Corteva.com and 1-800-992-5994; the letter to distributors adds the FTC at bccompliance@ftc.gov.
What the record does not say
- Whether the judge has signed. Hugin found no entered order.
- What happens to prices. The FTC says the settlement "will lead to lower pesticide prices for American farmers". No document Hugin read estimates by how much.
- Which distributors took part, or which category programs Corteva may keep. Those lists are in appendices withheld from the public copy.
- What the separate settlement says. The FTC and the states agree not to challenge a settlement reached in separate multidistrict litigation in the same court, In re Crop Protection Products. Hugin did not read it.
- Whether the allegations are true. They were never tried as to Corteva.